LDS (Mormon) Discussion

[kevkelsar]

I am more than willing to answer many, if not all, questions any of you may have about the LDS Church. However, to help keep things from getting out of hand, I have a few ground rules. This will assume that all who post in this thread read this initial post *fingers crossed*. ;)

First of all, when questioning a teaching or doctrine of the LDS Church, I want to make sure that you all understand where all official doctrines and teachings of the Church are found. In essence, there are three sources of doctrine in our Church:

1. Statements made by Prophets, Apostles, and other General Authorities during General Conferences. General Conference is held twice a year (first week of April and first week of October) and is broadcast throughout the entire world. Nothing is kept secret, all are welcome to listen live, or read transcripts after.

2. The Scriptures. Which include: The Old Testament, the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.

3. Any other official publication of the LDS Church, such as lesson manuals, leadership manuals, etc. You can know if something is an official publication of the LDS Church by simply looking on the back cover of the publication. All official publications will have "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" logo on the back. The inside front cover will also usually state, "Published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".

Anything outside of these three sources is not considered an official teaching or doctrine of the LDS Church unless they have been quoted in one of the three types of sources listed. So, with that said, anything brought up about The Journal of Discourses or other publications are not official doctrines or teachings. Hence, if you question why we "believe" something from those sources, just know that we don't, unless that specific teaching has been quoted in one of the three sources above.

Please note the subject of this thread, it is meant to be a discussion, not a debate. In answering questions I will not be "shoving" my beliefs on anyone. I will simply be stating what we believe, so take it however you please. I don't expect you all to agree with or accept everything I say, but I do expect you to have an open mind to understand what I say. In return, I ask you to expect the same from me. I love learning what others believe, and truly seek to understand why they believe what they do. Ignorance of another's belief has led to so many terrible and tragic misunderstandings in the history of our world. We tend to fear that which we don't understand.

Also, please know that I will try very hard to get back to everyone. I'm brand new to these forums and don't know if there are others who are LDS. But my bet is that there are very few. So just understand that there are lots of you and few of us. I'm also a hard working husband, father of three children, working two jobs, and serve in my Church as leader and teacher of the 12 and 13 year old boys. Sometimes life gets very hectic and busy and time does not always allow for immediate and fast responses.

Finally, please understand that some of my responses may have to be vague. There are quite a few teachings and doctrines that are harder to chew than others without a complete and thorough understanding of other basic beliefs. Basically, milk before meat. Just look at your own personal walk with Christ. You didn't start out knowing and understanding everything you know and understand right now. In addition, you will continue to grow in knowledge and understanding as you progress in this life. We all must learn step by step, little by little. I don't want to make you jump 20 steps to understand something, so I won't go into full details all the time. I will try to avoid explaining so much that it just causes even more confusion, yet just enough to get the basic idea covered.

I know, I'm such a demanding Mormon! Anyway, let the fun begin!

 

[Ed the Ned]

Hi Kev I am keen to have a discussion with you regarding your faith, but It is important that you do understand I have many reservations about the Mormon Faith. I respect the way you live and I believe you have great morals and values, its what you believe in that I cannot get to grips with and I might be a bit forward and blunt in saying I never will.
So I appreciate the fact you will not force your beliefs on me. I intern will not force my beliefs back on you.
Please understand that to me this is a Christian site and forum and although its great to have you on the forum I don't classify the LDS church as a Christian church or a denomination of the Christian church. This is my opinion and I am sure many will disagree with me.
I am reading books that question mormonism and I will consider the guidlines you have written before accepting anything that is written.
I also appreciate it that you have accepted the task of answering some of my questions as Johnny faded from the forum. Just to add one small thing, I live in South Africa and we do have a LDS church in our town.

 

[kevkelsar]

I'm very aware that many here have reservations about what we believe. And while my initial post may seem a bit demanding, those ground rules stem from many experiences in discussing my beliefs with other Christians. When those "rules" are thrown out the door, it just gets ugly real fast.

Although many on these forums don't consider the LDS Church to be Christian, that is fine. I know that I am a Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ and His teachings. All we do in the LDS Church is teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and invite all to come unto Him. If you don't think I'm a Christian, that's your opinion/belief. To me, I am a Christian. And I'm quite sure we'll get into the whole discussion that the "Mormon" Christ is not the real Christ as that is one topic that always surfaces.

 

[toddm]

Kev, I appreciate the respectful manner by which you wish to engage discussion. Many LDS members claim to be Christian (as you have) and that you follow the Gospel of Jesus. Can you define what you mean by "Christian" and also define or layout the Gospel. Could you also please define who you believe Jesus Christ to be (his nature and what he did on earth)? I ask this because, in my experience of dialoging w/ LDS members, these terms are never really defined and often there are very different definitions for the same words (so clarity is key to having a healthy discussion here).

Thanks, and i look forward to this discussion.

 

[LostSoul]

Why do Mormons have the Book of Mormon in addition to the Bible? What purpose is it to serve?

 

[kevkelsar]

Good heavens! A full week and a half to "upgrade software?" Anywho, I hope that isn't common around here. Here's a first response.

Kev, I appreciate the respectful manner by which you wish to engage discussion. Many LDS members claim to be Christian (as you have) and that you follow the Gospel of Jesus. Can you define what you mean by "Christian" and also define or layout the Gospel.

A Christian is a believer in and follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I believe starting out with that most basic and fundamental definition is best. I'm quite sure more discussion will come on what exactly are those "teachings" of Jesus Christ.

Now, as for the Gospel. This mostly comes from an explanation on LDS.org, the official website of the LDS Church.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is Heavenly Father’s plan for the happiness and salvation of His children and is centered on the Atonement (suffering for our sins, death on behalf of us, and resurrection) of Jesus Christ. Heavenly Father sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into the world to show us how to live meaningful and happy lives and experience eternal joy after this life. Through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ, we can become clean from sin through repentance and enjoy peace of conscience. To become worthy to live in Heavenly Father’s presence after this life and to receive this peace and strength, we must learn and follow the principles and ordinances of the gospel. The first principles of the gospel are faith in Jesus Christ and repentance. The first ordinances of the gospel are baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. After we learn and follow the first principles and ordinances of the gospel, we must seek to follow Christ’s example throughout the remainder of our life. This continued faithfulness is called “enduring to the end.â€

God sent His Beloved Son, Jesus Christ, into the world so that all of His children would have the possibility of returning to live in His presence after they die. Only through the Savior’s grace and mercy can we become clean from sin so that we can live in your Heavenly Father’s presence.

Because of Christ’s Atonement and Resurrection, all people will be brought back into the presence of the Lord to be judged according to their works and their desires and according to the laws of justice and mercy. The Savior satisfied the demands of justice for those who repent of their sins and endeavor to keep all of His commandments when He stood in our place and suffered the penalty for all sins. Because of the selfless act of the Atonement, Christ can plead with the Father on our behalf. Heavenly Father can apply mercy, withhold eternal consequences from us and welcome us into His presence. However, Jesus did not eliminate our personal responsibility. We must show that we accept Christ and that we have faith in Him by keeping His commandments and obeying the first principles and ordinances of the gospel.

Could you also please define who you believe Jesus Christ to be (his nature and what he did on earth)? I ask this because, in my experience of dialoging w/ LDS members, these terms are never really defined and often there are very different definitions for the same words (so clarity is key to having a healthy discussion here).

Thanks, and i look forward to this discussion.

I believe the best, and most clear, way to respond to this is to quote an official declaration from the First Presidency of the LDS Church back in 1999. I have it quoted below, but here is a direct link to it on LDS.org.

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.j...toid=e1fa5f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

As we commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ two millennia ago, we offer our testimony of the reality of His matchless life and the infinite virtue of His great atoning sacrifice. None other has had so profound an influence upon all who have lived and will yet live upon the earth.

He was the Great Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Messiah of the New. Under the direction of His Father, He was the creator of the earth. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made†(John 1:3). Though sinless, He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. He “went about doing good†(Acts 10:38), yet was despised for it. His gospel was a message of peace and goodwill. He entreated all to follow His example. He walked the roads of Palestine, healing the sick, causing the blind to see, and raising the dead. He taught the truths of eternity, the reality of our premortal existence, the purpose of our life on earth, and the potential for the sons and daughters of God in the life to come.

He instituted the sacrament as a reminder of His great atoning sacrifice. He was arrested and condemned on spurious charges, convicted to satisfy a mob, and sentenced to die on Calvary’s cross. He gave His life to atone for the sins of all mankind. His was a great vicarious gift in behalf of all who would ever live upon the earth.

We solemnly testify that His life, which is central to all human history, neither began in Bethlehem nor concluded on Calvary. He was the Firstborn of the Father, the Only Begotten Son in the flesh, the Redeemer of the world.

He rose from the grave to “become the firstfruits of them that slept†(1 Corinthians 15:20). As Risen Lord, He visited among those He had loved in life. He also ministered among His “other sheep†(John 10:16) in ancient America. In the modern world, He and His Father appeared to the boy Joseph Smith, ushering in the long-promised “dispensation of the fulness of times†(Ephesians 1:10).

Of the Living Christ, the Prophet Joseph wrote: “His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying:

“I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father†(D&C 110:3–4).

Of Him the Prophet also declared: “And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives!

“For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father—

“That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God†(D&C 76:22–24).

We declare in words of solemnity that His priesthood and His Church have been restored upon the earth—“built upon the foundation of … apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone†(Ephesians 2:20).

We testify that He will someday return to earth. “And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together†(Isaiah 40:5). He will rule as King of Kings and reign as Lord of Lords, and every knee shall bend and every tongue shall speak in worship before Him. Each of us will stand to be judged of Him according to our works and the desires of our hearts.

We bear testimony, as His duly ordained Apostles—that Jesus is the Living Christ, the immortal Son of God. He is the great King Immanuel, who stands today on the right hand of His Father. He is the light, the life, and the hope of the world. His way is the path that leads to happiness in this life and eternal life in the world to come. God be thanked for the matchless gift of His divine Son.

 

[Ed the Ned]

Hi, I am still interested int he discussion, its the upgrading software issue that has kept me off. A simple question I have is about the translation of the plates. There are certain translations that are directly the same as the KJV. Why is this? ( I apologize I am at work at the moment and cannot give the exact verses right now.)

 

[kevkelsar]

Why do Mormons have the Book of Mormon in addition to the Bible? What purpose is it to serve?

In the simplest terms, the Book of Mormon verifies, as another testament of Christ, the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ. It is, then, a second witness that affirms (not replace) the truth of the Bible. For us, the Book of Mormon and the Bible go hand in hand, along with the Doctrine and Covenants ("modern" day revelations), and the Pearl of Great Price (revelations given to Joseph Smith with respect to Moses and translations of ancient documents written by Abraham).

The main purpose of the Book of Mormon is to testify of Jesus Christ. I believe the Book of Mormon Title Page explains its purpose very clearly:

Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever — And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations

 

[kevkelsar]

Hi, I am still interested int he discussion, its the upgrading software issue that has kept me off. A simple question I have is about the translation of the plates. There are certain translations that are directly the same as the KJV. Why is this? ( I apologize I am at work at the moment and cannot give the exact verses right now.)

Why would God change what He has said to other people? For me, it keeps consistency with what God has said to two different parts of the world. There are actually some that differ from the KJV of the Bible, as well. Why the differences? I guess you could compare it to the differences within the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) when one or more of the authors record the same event but give different details. I believe the reason for these differences could be a separate subject, so I'll just stick with answering your question directly.

 

[Ed the Ned]

I do respect that argument but, the plates were older than the KJV, why would the translation be the same. I do understand there were certain differences on some, but in some cases it is word for word.
That does not make sense.
If we look at later translations of the bible we see that there are differences. Although the message stays the same the way it is written has changed. I personally cannot see how this can be!

 

[LostSoul]

Why do Mormons have the Book of Mormon in addition to the Bible? What purpose is it to serve?

In the simplest terms, the Book of Mormon verifies, as another testament of Christ, the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ. It is, then, a second witness that affirms (not replace) the truth of the Bible. For us, the Book of Mormon and the Bible go hand in hand, along with the Doctrine and Covenants ("modern" day revelations), and the Pearl of Great Price (revelations given to Joseph Smith with respect to Moses and translations of ancient documents written by Abraham).

The main purpose of the Book of Mormon is to testify of Jesus Christ. I believe the Book of Mormon Title Page explains its purpose very clearly:

Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever — And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations

So, if I understand you right...you use this in addition to scripture which clearly already states not to add or take away from scripture? Why is this book of Mormon needed in addition to the bible? This is the part I do not understand.

 

[kevkelsar]

I do respect that argument but, the plates were older than the KJV, why would the translation be the same. I do understand there were certain differences on some, but in some cases it is word for word.
That does not make sense.
If we look at later translations of the bible we see that there are differences. Although the message stays the same the way it is written has changed. I personally cannot see how this can be!

Another point to consider is that the language Joseph Smith was translating from on the plates was a language completely unknown to him. Those who are fluent in two different languages can understand that direct translations, meaning word for word, do not always work out so well. It is the overall message/feeling/intent that needs to be translated, and Joseph Smith was translating these ancient writings into his common language. Therefore, it would make sense that the translation of teachings/phrases from the Book of Mormon that were similar to teachings found within the Bible would follow that of what was already common in his language at that time, which was the KJV. That's how Joseph Smith understood God's language because he was raised reading and learning from the KJV of the Bible.

I will, however, disagree with your comment that later translations of the Bible keep the same overall message. I have had some Christians quote verses from the Bible in the NLT version, yet when I go to my KJV to me the message has been skewed/changed from the KJV. *sigh*, so many discussions so little time and not wanting to go off topic. I hope my first paragraph in this post possibly addresses what doesn't make sense to you.

 

[kevkelsar]

So, if I understand you right...you use this in addition to scripture which clearly already states not to add or take away from scripture? Why is this book of Mormon needed in addition to the bible? This is the part I do not understand.

I will address an underlying subject I see in your question right now. Please remember that the statement not to add to "these things" first shows up in Deutoronomy (Deut. 4:2), and then again in Revelation (Rev. 22:18). Please also remember that when these statements were first written/spoken/made, the Bible (the compilation of writings that we currently read from) did not exist. They were all completely separate writings. Even during the times of Christ when He would read the words of the ancient prophets, He never said, "In the book of such and such it says..." He would state that a certain prophet wrote something. There was no "Bible" until scholars/priests combined all these writings into one book. In fact, the Bible as we now have it compiled was not officially accepted until the Council of Trent in the 1500s.

So, with that explanation, to take the literal command not to add anything would mean that everything written after Deutoronomy should be thrown out since it's all in addition. Of course, that is just silly.

Now, why is the Book of Mormon needed? Personally, I can see MANY reasons why it is needed. Just take a look at how many different Christian religions there are. Why? They all study from the same book: the Bible. Yet there are many different interpretations of the Bible, which leads to different beliefs. Sometimes these differences are incredibly significant (i.e. baptism is necessary, baptism is not necessary, verbal acceptance of Christ is enough for salvation, verbal acceptance of Christ is not enough for salvation, etc.)! So, we have one single book that has spawned so many contrasting views with respect to God.

What if we had a second witness of God's teachings? A second witness that confirms the first witness. Likewise, the first witness confirms the second. In other words, the two witnesses together help clear up many confusions that arise simply based upon any witness on its own.

In addition to this reason (which I think is of utmost importance to settle confusions on many key doctrines of the Gospel of Christ), it's proof that God loves all His children on this world, not just those in the Eastern half of the world. It's proof that God has provided His Word unto the whole world. Because just strictly based on what is written in the Bible, God's Word was only preached unto those in the Eastern half of the world. Sure, it says that the Gospel should be preached throughout the entire world, but there are no writings of the Gospel being preached outside of the Middle East, African, and immediately surrounding areas.

So, these two reasons, in my opinion, are paramount. To clear up the very obvious confusions and different interpretations that arise from one single witness (the Bible), and as proof that God really has provided His law and Gospel to other parts of the world outside of what is written in the Bible. This is not to say the Bible is flawed in any way, but that man's attempt to interpret what is not explicitly stated and spelled out word for word is flawed. There are other reasons, but I think those would involve a whole lot more explanation (i.e. signify the restoration of the Gospel and the end of the Apostasy).

 

[LostSoul]

So, if I understand you right...you use this in addition to scripture which clearly already states not to add or take away from scripture? Why is this book of Mormon needed in addition to the bible? This is the part I do not understand.

I will address an underlying subject I see in your question right now. Please remember that the statement not to add to "these things" first shows up in Deutoronomy (Deut. 4:2), and then again in Revelation (Rev. 22:18). Please also remember that when these statements were first written/spoken/made, the Bible (the compilation of writings that we currently read from) did not exist. They were all completely separate writings. Even during the times of Christ when He would read the words of the ancient prophets, He never said, "In the book of such and such it says..." He would state that a certain prophet wrote something. There was no "Bible" until scholars/priests combined all these writings into one book. In fact, the Bible as we now have it compiled was not officially accepted until the Council of Trent in the 1500s.

So, with that explanation, to take the literal command not to add anything would mean that everything written after Deutoronomy should be thrown out since it's all in addition. Of course, that is just silly.

Now, why is the Book of Mormon needed? Personally, I can see MANY reasons why it is needed. Just take a look at how many different Christian religions there are. Why? They all study from the same book: the Bible. Yet there are many different interpretations of the Bible, which leads to different beliefs. Sometimes these differences are incredibly significant (i.e. baptism is necessary, baptism is not necessary, verbal acceptance of Christ is enough for salvation, verbal acceptance of Christ is not enough for salvation, etc.)! So, we have one single book that has spawned so many contrasting views with respect to God.

What if we had a second witness of God's teachings? A second witness that confirms the first witness. Likewise, the first witness confirms the second. In other words, the two witnesses together help clear up many confusions that arise simply based upon any witness on its own.

In addition to this reason (which I think is of utmost importance to settle confusions on many key doctrines of the Gospel of Christ), it's proof that God loves all His children on this world, not just those in the Eastern half of the world. It's proof that God has provided His Word unto the whole world. Because just strictly based on what is written in the Bible, God's Word was only preached unto those in the Eastern half of the world. Sure, it says that the Gospel should be preached throughout the entire world, but there are no writings of the Gospel being preached outside of the Middle East, African, and immediately surrounding areas.

So, these two reasons, in my opinion, are paramount. To clear up the very obvious confusions and different interpretations that arise from one single witness (the Bible), and as proof that God really has provided His law and Gospel to other parts of the world outside of what is written in the Bible. This is not to say the Bible is flawed in any way, but that man's attempt to interpret what is not explicitly stated and spelled out word for word is flawed. There are other reasons, but I think those would involve a whole lot more explanation (i.e. signify the restoration of the Gospel and the end of the Apostasy).

You forget...even in Jesus' time...there were twelve disciples...did they all see things the same?It is highly unlikely. There were also many churches in the days following Jesus' crucifixion. For his own disciples were told to share with the world before Jesus' ascension to heaven. Yes, I am aware of the scribes it took, believe there were 70 or more...that came to together to decide what books were to be placed or had as part of scripture. While I may not agree with your belief in having an additional book outside of the Bible, I am not going to ridicule you on it. Just wanted your insight on that, and I thank you very much for having given that. Helps me to better understand your beliefs, even if I cannot share them.

 

[toddm]

Now, why is the Book of Mormon needed? Personally, I can see MANY reasons why it is needed. Just take a look at how many different Christian religions there are. Why? They all study from the same book: the Bible. Yet there are many different interpretations of the Bible, which leads to different beliefs. Sometimes these differences are incredibly significant (i.e. baptism is necessary, baptism is not necessary, verbal acceptance of Christ is enough for salvation, verbal acceptance of Christ is not enough for salvation, etc.)! So, we have one single book that has spawned so many contrasting views with respect to God.

Diversity is not necessarily wrong as long as those issues are not essential to salvation. A faith + works salvation is heresy and therefore is not a Christian teaching.

What if we had a second witness of God's teachings? A second witness that confirms the first witness. Likewise, the first witness confirms the second. In other words, the two witnesses together help clear up many confusions that arise simply based upon any witness on its own.

In addition to this reason (which I think is of utmost importance to settle confusions on many key doctrines of the Gospel of Christ), it's proof that God loves all His children on this world, not just those in the Eastern half of the world. It's proof that God has provided His Word unto the whole world. Because just strictly based on what is written in the Bible, God's Word was only preached unto those in the Eastern half of the world. Sure, it says that the Gospel should be preached throughout the entire world, but there are no writings of the Gospel being preached outside of the Middle East, African, and immediately surrounding areas.

So, these two reasons, in my opinion, are paramount. To clear up the very obvious confusions and different interpretations that arise from one single witness (the Bible), and as proof that God really has provided His law and Gospel to other parts of the world outside of what is written in the Bible. This is not to say the Bible is flawed in any way, but that man's attempt to interpret what is not explicitly stated and spelled out word for word is flawed. There are other reasons, but I think those would involve a whole lot more explanation (i.e. signify the restoration of the Gospel and the end of the Apostasy).

Okay, this is all fine and dandy, but the key question is HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE BOM IS INDEED THE WORD OF GOD?

LDS theology and Christian theology are not in harmony. The Bible and the BOM are not in harmony. You can't say that the BOM is another "witness" when it doesn't harmonize w/ the Word of God.

LDS doctrine teaches that God is simply an exalted man. The Bible teaches that God is eternal and has never had a beginning and He has never been human.

LDS doctrine teaches that the atonement was not SOLELY in the cross, but that it began in Gethsemane.

LDS doctrine teaches that Joseph Smith was a prophet, even though he fails every test for a prophet of God as outlined in the Bible.

LDS doctrine teaches that you must do all you can to earn your salvation by doing good works, but then God's grace kicks in "after all you can do". That's a works-based salvation and is in stark contradiction to the Bible.

LDS doctrine teaches that Christ is a created being and lesser than the Father. Christian doctrine teaches that he is co-equal and co-eternal.

LDS doctrine teaches that God actually wanted Adam & Eve to "transgress" (LDS make a distinction between transgression and sin). The Bible teaches that God abhors sin and His desire is that we should be holy because He is holy.

LDS doctrine teaches polytheism. The Bible very clearly teaches monotheism.

These are just SOME of the main points of difference, and these are major differences. So, how can you say that the BOM is a continuation of the Bible, yet have so many areas of contradiction? Does God change His mind? Does God need to improve on what He's already said as if His Word is not eternal?

Furthermore, w/ said differences, how can a LDS member label themselves a "Christian" when they flat-out deny the very doctrines that define a Christian?

 

[kevkelsar]

That's a lot to respond to at once. Mind if I take a bit of time to respond to each statement? I hope to get to it today, but probably not until this evening when I'm home. It would take much to time out of my work to go through all those points.

 

[toddm]

That's a lot to respond to at once. Mind if I take a bit of time to respond to each statement? I hope to get to it today, but probably not until this evening when I'm home. It would take much to time out of my work to go through all those points.

Yep, no problem. Take all the time you need.

 

[kevkelsar]

Okay, this is all fine and dandy, but the key question is HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE BOM IS INDEED THE WORD OF GOD?

As stated in another thread, because I have taken what is taught in the Book of Mormon, applied it to my life, prayed about its teachings, and have had the Holy Ghost manifest to me that it is the Word of God, just like the Bible is the Word of God. I went through the same process with the Bible and its teachings. I continue to use the same process when official doctrine of the LDS Church (official, as defined in my initial post) is presented to me.

I will simply restate the scripture references that support this process of knowing whether something is of God or not.

John 7:17, do what is taught to know if it comes from God or from man.
John 14:26, the Holy Ghost will teach us all things
Moroni 10:4-5, read and come to understand the words, pray with sincerity, and the Holy Ghost will reveal what is true.
Galatians 5:22-23, how to recognize the Spirit, or Holy Ghost, by its fruits.

 

[kevkelsar]

LDS theology and Christian theology are not in harmony. The Bible and the BOM are not in harmony. You can't say that the BOM is another "witness" when it doesn't harmonize w/ the Word of God.

Do you have specific examples where the Bible and Book of Mormon are not in harmony? I would be happy to look at them if you do.

 

[kevkelsar]

LDS doctrine teaches that God is simply an exalted man. The Bible teaches that God is eternal and has never had a beginning and He has never been human.

LDS doctrine also teaches that God is eternal, that He has had no beginning and will have no end. Where in the Bible does it specifically teach that God was never a man?

LDS doctrine teaches that the atonement was not SOLELY in the cross, but that it began in Gethsemane.

Yes, we truly believe that the overall Atonement began with His suffering in Gethsemane. We believe that during His suffering in Gethsemane is when He took upon Himself the sins, pains, sicknesses, etc. of everyone. The pain and anguish was so excruciating that there were drops of blood from every pore, and that an angel came to assist Him.

We believe that Christ's sufferings in Gethsemane was when He overcame spiritual death, or our separation from the presence of God. His physical death and resurrection signified the triumph over our physical deaths, meaning that because He overcame death, one day we will all be resurrected.

It's these two parts that fulfilled the Atonement; overcoming spiritual death by taking upon Himself all our sins, pains, imperfections, etc. so that we may one day be allowed to enter God's presence and overcoming the physical death so that we may be resurrected.

LDS doctrine teaches that Joseph Smith was a prophet, even though he fails every test for a prophet of God as outlined in the Bible.

Will you please provide me these "tests" outlined in the Bible and specific examples where Joseph Smith "failed" these "tests"? I would be happy to respond to any of those, but without specifics I can't really respond.