When talking to some Mormon missionaries in March I encountered an interesting line of thinking. One of the elders gave the standard claim that the Bible is missing books that should have been included.
I asked, “Which ones?”
He answered: Works that the Bible makes mention of.
So I asked, “So, mere mention of a work in scripture (of something presumably written by another prophet) indicates that the work should have been included in the canon as scripture?”
They answered, “Yes, because what prophets write should be considered scripture.”
This later was downgraded to a more modest claim: That the majority of what prophets write for public consumption should be considered scripture.
This is the default, functioning, practical view of mainstream Mormonism:
“We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.” (Article #9)
This is “functionally” (in practice) taken to encompass most of what the LDS Church teaches and publishes, especially General Conference messages. I call this approach prima ecclesia. (It is far different than the standard LDS apologetic approach, which is something akin to sola scriptura.)
Just to dig this in, I asked: “Would you agree that prophets should be held to a high standard of expectation and accountability over what they publicly teach about God and the gospel?”
They answered, “Yes.”
These kinds of principles are important to pull out and explicate. Get them on the table. Help your Mormon neighbor commit to these principles — out loud. With words they commit to. This might seem simple but it’s radical. It implicitly presses the point that prophets should not be given a free pass for false teachings — especially and most obviously for public false teachings about God and the gospel which are never repented of.
The more clear and heavy you make the point, the more powerful things like Adam-God and the priesthood ban are. Jesus said to inspect alleged prophets by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-20). Serious fruit-inspection is a way of obeying Jesus. We’re also helping Mormons obey their own scripture: to study things out in their mind instead of depending on mere emotional epiphanies (D&C 9:7-8). I love what my friend Matt says about fruit-inspection: “Don’t do it with binoculars.” Peel the skin off and get dirty. It’s our responsibility.
I’m surprised at this! I really am.
Where is there room then for LDS “folk doctrine” and “opinion”. These MM just took off the table two of the most effective, in their minds, techniques that LDS folks use to deal with embarrassing and off-the-wall proclamations by their prophets.
Not to play the critic here, but it would have been interesting to ask them about all of the changes that have been made to the BoM, some directly effecting LDS doctrine.
Anyway, having been raised Catholic, I know where the “lost books of the Bible” are. They are in the Catholic Bible. Once again this proves that the Catholic church is indeed, the “one true Church”; blowing the LDS claim of being such, out of the water. 🙂
“The fifteen Apocryphal books which the Roman Catholics have included in their Bibles, come from a collection of about eighteen or more books written during the Inter-testamental Period. This period of four hundred years began with God giving the last book of the Old Testament which was Malachi. The Inter-testamental period ended with the coming of Christ and the writing of the New Testament. During this four hundred years God sent no prophets to Israel and was silent giving no written revelation.”
” The word “apocrypha” means “of questionable authenticity.” These are called non canonical books because when the canon of Scriptures (the sixty six books of the Old and New Testaments) was accepted by the early Christians they recognized that these books contained spurious material and therefore were not inspired of God. Other names for these books are “hidden” or “deuterocanonical” books. These books are also called “pseudepigraphal”, meaning “false writings” to designate them as spurious and unauthentic books of the late centuries B. C. and early centuries A. D. These books contain religious folklore and have never been considered inspired of God by biblical Christians from the earliest times of churches.”
“Some have referred to these books as the missing books of the Bible and conclude they are new discovers which are part of God’s revelation. Nothing could be further from the truth. The sixty six books that comprise the Old and Testament are God’s revelation to man and when John completed the Book of Revelation, God’s word to man was complete. God has not added to His revelation since. The content of these spurious books shows them to be inspired of man…not God…………….”
Just think of all the things a person could claim by using the “missing” explanation.
I could go to the bank and ask why the ten million dollars that my grandfather had deposited fifty years ago is missing and why there is no record of it.
………..and then there’s the concept of the “prophet” who speaks for God. The Jehovah Witnesses have Watchtower that is the prophetic message proclaimers. Given the LDS idea of “prophet” just about anyone with a message would qualify.
The curious thing about stuff that goes missing, in the LDS paradigm, is the fact that there isn’t any evidence that it ever existed.
Aaron,
The sad thing about Mormon logic is that it can’t be reasoned with. Here is a line from the Dark Knight which I think sums up “Mormon logic,” while substituting only 2 words.
“Some men aren’t looking for anything logical like Truth. They can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some me just want to Believe.”
For Mormons, if it agrees with the Prophet, it is true. If it disagrees with the Prophet it is from Satan. That is their epistemological framework. It’s all very sad really.
MT
When the leadership speaks, the thinking has been done.
Follow your leaders. They will never lead you astray.
Oh yea!
The Mormon prophets are right except when they’re not. Mormons haul out their prophet who speaks for the Mormon god when they think it’s advantageous to do so. These same prophets can be tossed under the bus when that serves the current folks who try to defend Mormonism, when that serves their purpose.
Brigham Young has become the crazy uncle living in the LDS attic when it’s revealed who the guy really was and what he taught. We’ve got an extensive record of what Young proclaimed as the Mormon prophet. It’s way embarrassing in this day and age.
Let’s face it. Mormonism just doesn’t work on any level.
The way Mormons have been taught to use the ” missing books ” of the Bible argument is
largely a red herring . This phrase is used by them to imply that there should be more to
the New Testament , for example, than what we have today etc . This opens up a convenient
way for Mormon leaders to provide ” lost doctrines ” from books that were supposed
to be in the New Testament , and thus we need Mormonism to lead us into a true knowledge
of , or a saving relationship with , God , because we can’t get sufficient information about
this by merely embracing what’s in the Bible alone — the 66 books we have today .
One would think that , given the seriousness Mormon leaders have placed on this issue , that
they would have been directed by God to rectify a missing books/writings ” problem ” ,
after all these men claim to be personally directed by Jesus to exclusively lead His church .
But Mormon leadership still only has a Bible ( KJV ) of 66 books that is their official version.
Furthermore , the Book of Mormon contains the names of prophets ( Zenos , Zenock etc ) more
could be known about but especially the fact that Mormons don’t have all their prophecies /
writings today . In fact the Book of Mormon in Mosiah 1:3-5 mentions about writings that
were recorded on plates of brass that were preserved by God for future generations to read
and come to know truth about Him etc , a king Benjamin is telling his sons about how God
has provided these truths , and yet in vr 8 it says that what this king did teach his sons many
of those things ” are not written in this book ” . Now this story is not to unlike what Bible
believing christians say about the Bible , namely that God has indeed preserved His word
through the centuries for mankind to have today , but not everything written by men therein
were necessary to be included in what God chose us to have now . See Jn 20:30,31.
What we have in the Bible in the 66 books is knowledge about God as well as the gospel of
salvation preached by Jesus’ apostles — Rom 1:16 ; Col 1:20-23 . That gospel is still being
embraced by people today and they are saved and reconciled to God .
It’s the latter days prophets like those who run the Mormon church who got an idea that more
truth is needed to save people and thus have augmented the true gospel with some latter days
” new light ” , new doctrines from these men who claim exclusive “authority ” to direct Jesus’
church and teach His true gospel of salvation , though unavailable to man on earth for 1700
years it was made available again in 1830 when Joseph Smith showed up on the scene .
Paul’s words in Gal 1:8 and 2Tim 4:3,4 are appropriate to describe the behavior of latter days
prophets/ like those who run the Mormon church .
The real reason why Mormon leaders need to convince their followers about the Bible being
anemic to record the cure for mankind’s estrangement from God is because Mormonism
would’nt be what it claims and what it has claimed to have . It claims to be the only true church
of Jesus Christ on the earth , and it claims to have the true / saving knowledge about God and
how man can be reconciled to Him and receive eternal life . However , both of these claims
are false . Rev 2:2 .
The Mormon people can take stock that the true knowledge of God and the gospel that saves
have been preserved by Him in the Bible we have today . Don’t allow rabbit trails , like the
” missing books ” one to get you off track from discovering the ultimate good news God has
man , which the Bible provides .
Mike,
I’m back to my favorite question:
“So what the LDS church believes, teaches and practices is exactly what the NT/first century Church believed, taught and practiced.”
Not only that, what the LDS church believes, teaches and practices is exactly what the ancient Jews believed, taught and practiced. It would all be there in the “lost books of the Bible”. What I can’t figure out is how does the “lost books of the Bible” fit with the “Monks of the Catholic Church in the middle ages left Mormonism out of the Bible” conspiracy?
It’s all laughable except that the consequences of believing all of the Mormon mythology is so devastating.
Finally, the FLDS sees the LDS as an apostate Mormon church. In addition to this, of all of the hundred or so sects of Mormonism, which one has the real prophet and the real restored gospel?
The correct answer is: NONE!
Cartoon idea:
Two panes: each with a man entering a room to find another man tearing pages out of aa book,pages strewn on the floor. The man taking the pages out says “I’m the prophet and God told me to take them out.”. Above the first pane is the title “The lost books of the Bible”and above the other: “The lost revelations of the Doctrine and Covenants”. For reinforcement and maybe extra kick, along the bottom of the two panes put “The prophet’s revelations are true.”or something like that.
I can’t draw humans very well, so someone else could provide the drawings. Could be used as is for humor and point or even on the street to discuss the authority of the prophet to remove the words of God from scripture, Book of Commandment vs. DnC, conflict between Smith doing the very crime he accused early Christians of doing, . I see a marker board with this comic in poster tattooed at the top and marking under each pane, apostasy vs. “restoration”, lost books of Bible vs. lost revelations of Book of Commandments, , line upon (lost) line revisionism… Oh, I mean “restoration”, oops!
Thank the Lord for ministries like MRM and the rest who keep up the defense of the Gospel of Jesus Christ on a daily basis by exposing the imposter gospel of Mormonism.
Never have been a Mormon, it’s difficult for me to believe how people could be taken in by this ruse but if someone believes something and more importantly “feels” something associated with a false belief, it takes a jolt to knock them off of center.
Most frequently the beginning jolt, albeit a subtle ripple, is asking a probing question. It’s related to leading people to the truth through questions that begin to make them think.
I saw all of this first hand, as I’ve reported several times here, as my wife and I sat in the “murder room” of the Carthage Jail. I simply asked, “What were the events that led-up to Joseph Smith being incarcerated?” These sincere, devout and totally deceived Mormons said, “It was all due to the persecution of the prophet.” My wife piped up, “But what were the events preceding this?”
The Mormons in the room were either playing dumb or they didn’t know about William Law, a leader in the Mormon church, who found out about Smith’s polygamy and other things and exposed it through his newspaper. This led to the destruction of William Law’s newspaper and the arrest of Smith and his brother.
I’ve determined that it takes about eighteen months from the time serious questioning begins and when a Mormon throws up their hands and concludes it’s all a lie. Having the patience to ask the probing questions and letting the Holy Spirit to lead the Mormon out of the sect is very important.
Thus was the asking of a few key questions of the MM very important. It was the patience of a Baptist minister in giving Micah Wilder the floor that led to that minister being able to make a short presentation that eventually led Micah to study the NT and conclude that the gospel he was promoting wasn’t the gospel presented (in the NT).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDbeM6CZwIY
Falcon, here’s the bottom line with these issues :
– When Mormons use this “missing ” or ” lost books ” of the Bible it’s usually is to infer
that these writings contain doctrines that are the unique doctrines of Mormonism etc.
This is a red herring . It is fruitless discussion because it assumes too much . I could use
this same rational against the Book of Mormon and what should have been included in
the writings of it’s prophets and preserved to our day . So Mormons are accountable for
what is written in the present Book of Mormon . It’s because the Bible does not teach
some of the important Mormon doctrines that Mormon leaders choose to use a rabbit
trail to divert away from realizing what the Bible offers — the truth about our Creator and
the ” way ” sinful humanity can know Him personally and receive His forgiveness and gift of
eternal life — Jn 14:6 ; Rom 6:23 .
– Can we trust Mormon leaders to be reliable guides in teaching spiritual truths ?
Short answer : no .
Their track record of gospel preaching reveals a pattern , it’s a record of unstable teachings.
These men can not be trusted to provide doctrinal safety . Their followers have been tossed
to and fro ever since their leaders allegedly restored Jesus’ church and gospel ” in 1830.
Mormonism is not Jesus’ church restored after having been extinct on the earth for 1700
years , Mormon leaders did’nt restore Jesus’ church they replaced it with a good imitation.
Appropriate scriptures for conscientious Mormons to consider :
Matt 24:11 ; 2Cor 11:4 ; Gal 1:8 ; Eph 4:14 .
“when John completed the Book of Revelation, God’s word to man was complete. God has not added to His revelation since.”
Your statement would seem in invalidate those later books in the NT.
Just saying.
See:
2 Peter
“There is a strong scholarly consensus that 2 Peter is the last New Testament document to be written. Some date it as late as 150, and most date it between 120 and 150. Among the reasons for its late dating are its references to 1 Peter (3.1), its mention of the letters of Paul (3.15-16), and its use of phrases from the letter of Jude. In addition, it offers an explanation for the delay of the second coming of Jesus (3.3-10).”
(Evolution of the Word: The New Testament in the Order the Books Were Written)
Mike,
I liked what Christian apologist Dr. Walter Martin use to say. “Question everything someone tells you, including me.”
The foundation on which Mormonism is built is totally bogus and easily checked out. Without that foundational claim, there is no reason for Mormonism. So can that claim that “after the death of the apostles, the gospel disappeared from the earth” be verified by Mormon authorities? No it can’t.
They make some idiotic claim about the various councils that the early church held in the first four hundred years; and that the gospel of Jesus Christ was usurped by the Emperor. What stupidity! We know the history of the early Church. We know what went on at the councils and that they were held to combat heresy in the early Church.
But here we have these Mormon prophets, specifically Joseph Smith, making the claim that God the Father and Jesus appeared to him and thus he is a prophet with the real message. So he spins a yarn about a lost tribe of Israel that came to the Americas and became the ancestors of the American Indians. DNA evidence, as we all know, disproves this claim. However to a TBM there’s always an explanation, the more convoluted the better.
Mormons need to dump their prophets and get back to God’s Word where the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is revealed.
Before christians respond to Mormon leaders relegating the Bible to the ” not sufficient ”
shelf because of the pre-eminence of their modern day revelations / teachings occupy ,
the result of alleged ” missing books/ writings ” from the present Bible , before christians
gently correct this Mormon folklore it’s important to address what Mormons claim was also
lost , namely , Jesus’ church . Mormon leaders have even taught that christianity died off !
The church Jesus established through His apostles , and the gospel of salvation that they were
sent out to teach were corrupted and lost not long after their deaths . Mormon leaders claim
that salvation was unavailable to man on earth for 1700 years until a Mormon prophet
arrived on the scene and advertised this whole problem was being fixed by God through him .
With this scenario at the front of their claims Mormon leaders found it necessary to make it
easier for would be followers to accept new doctrines . They accomplished this by saying that
the Bible was also the victim of evil men , and though it did’nt fare as bad a fate as Jesus’ church
still it was deemed to have been also corrupted and salvation doctrines lost from it .
Thus according to Mormon leaders , evil men overcame both Jesus’ church and His word
written by His apostles to the point that mankind was in spiritual darkness for 1700 years .
Interesting note on all this is that Mormon leaders today claim that their church is the only
true church of Jesus restored to earth in exactly the same form as it existed when Jesus
established it 2000 years ago . The very same church and gospel of salvation .
However , when it comes to the Bible contents were any of the alleged ” lost books ” also
restored ? Mormon leaders offer the 66 books and the KJV as their Bible today , why ?
Though Joseph Smith introduced a version of the Bible containing what he deemed as
corrected translation of some verses in the KJV , still no lost books were restored to this
his ” Inspired Version ” . Instead Mormon leadership simply introduce new scripture and
new doctrines . Thus the Bible finds a home on the shelf labeled ” dead prophets ” , the
scriptures from whom deemed insufficient for salvation by the prophets of Mormonism.
This whole issue with the Bible and Mormonism is simply a sad state of affairs . God has
provided a knowledge of Himself and how sinners can be forgiven and reconciled to Him
thus receiving eternal life from Him , this information has not been lost , it has not been
unavailable to man from soon after the apostles deaths until 1830 . Yet this is how false
prophets arising in the latter days — MK 13:22-23 —- have fooled sincere people into
following them and accepting new ” requirements ” for receiving eternal life .
Mormon leaders are such prophets .
Their tales of a complete apostasy of Jesus church and from His gospel are what we should
expect from latter days false prophets seeking to get a foot in the door to people’s hearts
and minds and thus detour them into accepting a counterfeit .
The Mormon people deserve better . Help and understanding is available from caring ministries
like MRM .
vikingz2000,
So you are siding with the liberal scholars and evoking their consensus? Why stop there on 2 Peter? You must also accept the documentary hypothesis, I assume then? As well as the position of deutero-Isaiah? Surely you must also strongly follow the consensus of the Jesus Seminar and accept the Gospel of Thomas as more credible to the canon that the Gospel of John? Or do you just pick and choose which liberal scholastic position to take when it suits you best?
The fact that you are willing to throw the Bible under the bus, speaks volumes. But at least that position is consistent with LDS doctrine because the Bible is the only part of your “scriptures” that is Word of God “in so far that it is translated correctly”. If the Word of God has been manipulated and perverted to the point of ambiguous veracity it can no longer be the Word of God, but rather the Work of the Devil. So the LDS religion is “Christian” how again?
@MistakenTestimony
Whoa! Bad day, dude?.
Like I said, in case you missed it: “Just saying.”
MT
Generally speaking, when we have someone show-up here wanting to dispute the cannon of scripture they usually side with very liberal scholars or atheists. At least we know who they most readily identify with.
Ah what difference does it make to a Mormon? They just go by how something makes them feel any way.
BTW, I wonder what these liberal scholars would say about the BoM and the BoA?
In addition, just google “can we trust the Bible?” That ought to keep a Mormon doubter busy for a while. I’d agree that the Holy Spirit can keep the Word accurate and in tact. Mormons don’t have that kind of confidence in God.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-you-can-trust-your-bible/
Falcon, you said, “BTW, I wonder what these liberal scholars would say about the BoM and the BoA?” Exactly, they would vigorously defend both books and treat any criticism as if water off of a ducks back. Yet they latch on to all criticism against the Biblical canon. The BoM and BoA are clearly products of the 19th with no antiquity as they claim.
vikingz2000, please engage my counterpoint to your point. Simply saying, “Whoa! Bad day, dude?” is not an appropriate building block in the discussion. Help me to understand what you meant by what you said; what type of reaction would you have expected—agreement? What do you think about the thrust of my counterpoint—do you agree or disagree? Am I right or wrong in my assessment of your position? If I’m wrong please tell me why.
And by using the expression “just saying” does not mean that you are just throwing out information that you neither agree nor disagree with. For example, if Falcon says to me, “Brazil is the greatest football team on earth,” then I would say to him, “Brazil was just beat by Germany by the highest point difference in World Cup history, and they lost to Netherlands in the losers bracket. Just saying.” I clearly have a dog in that fight.
So if you say something that you agree with, then if I disagree, that does not mean that I am having a bad day, does it? But if you make an ideological statement that you agree with, why would you try to frame it afterwards as if you were just throwing out random stuff for the simply the sake of doing it?
I don’t believe this is a type of forum to where people just come to post random information that they may or may not care about. Nor do I believe that this is a type of forum to where people can just make assumptions about other people’s personal lives based solely on the fact that they disagree with each other.
MT
We call that sort of post a “drive-by”.
Clyde, who hasn’t been here in weeks, specialized in that sort of post. First of all it’s lazy. Second of all it shows very little respect for the other posters.
But here’s the deal, it’s a tactic that requires no thought, no effort but is thought to be able to make an impact.
Think how serious a topic this is and yet it’s taken flippantly. Can God be very pleased with a person who doesn’t have any more respect for His Word than that? But then Mormons have no respect for the nature of God either. To them, God is just another man who worked His way through the LDS system and became “a god” just like they hope to do. God, for a Mormon, is just like them but further along in the process.
Jesus taught that “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” (emphasis mine). If there are books referenced in the Bible that came from the mouth of God, then these too should be classed as scripture. This means that the Bible is incomplete without those books. Especially since one of the references states – “And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.” (Collosians 4:16) The church in Collosians were REQUIRED to read the epistle that was sent to Laodicea, giving it an importance just as the epistle to the Collosians was important. If the epistle to the Collosians was included in the Bible and the other epistle was just as important then it too should be included.
So to say that the Bible is complete is ridiculous, the books in it were chosen by a group of people and they decided when they had enough. It does not mean that there are not any other books out there that are not scripture (ie separate from the Bible like the BoM) or should not be included in the Bible (ie the books referred to in the Bible that are missing from it). These references do show that we are missing some of the words that God gave to man, and if we need to live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God then we need to keep in mind the Bible is lacking somewhat.
Ralph,
Consider this haiku that falcon wrote on a napkin,
Spring rolls are frozen,
Spaghetti Monster eats mine,
I am so hungry.
Now let’s say that I take falcon’s haiku and re write it to where it says,
Meatballs were frozen,
Monster Jesus eats all mine,
I am still hungry.
Now is this haiku mine or falcon’s? This haiku is no long the word of falcon, it is now my word. I have taken dominion over the whole haiku. In the same way, the LDS position is that the Bible is no longer the Word of God, it is now the word of Satan because it has fallen under his dominion. This is consistent with their view of the body of Christ which has fallen under the power of Satan.
Now this is problematic for the LDS position due to the sovereignty of God. The member of the LDS pantheon who has become the God of our world is obviously very weak because not only can he not keep the church of his son from being destroyed by Satan, but he can’t even keep his very word from being destroyed by Satan. It’s amazing how much theology they build off of the only book they consider to be the work of Satan. JWs are better because at least they believe that the Bible has not been corrupted.
This is all about the obfuscation of LDS religion. They want people to think that they believe the Bible is the Word of God but really they don’t. They want people to believe that they are Christians but really they just create a superficial criteria for defining a Christian while maintains that Christians are the whore of the earth. At least the JWs say that they are not Christians. So Mormons should be as honest as the JWs: Mormons need to say that if Mormons are Christians then non-Mormons are absolutely not Christians, and they need to say that since the Bible is the work of Satan then it is not to be included in the LDS canon of Scriptures.
I can’t think of another religion that has a book in their canon that is the work of their theological enemy? Can anybody else think of one? How very dishonest and manipulative lip service.
Ralph,
The problem with your logic has many flaws.
If JS really was a prophet of God, then why did God simply not put these missing books into the BoM?
Why don’t your prophets go and ask God what books are missing and add them? Your prophets claim to speak for God, yet they can never seem to get any real answers from Him?
Then the Bible says this:
So it seems many things according to your logic are missing from the Bible, but we simply cannot read every thing Jesus said and live it out, if the world could not contain all the Books.
I would say that the Bible is ENOUGH. What more do we need? Time after time it has been shown that when men try to add to it, their doctrines turn to heresy and a turning from the intent of the original to prop up the supposed “authority” of those that try to add to it. With Joseph Smith, this is quite obvious. Jo first claimed that the Trinity doctrine was ok. Then changed that. He claimed that Priesthood was obtained by LINEAGE, and so one needed no angelic ordinations until his authority was challenged, then changed that. He went from One god to three gods. The list goes on and on. So, yes, those that rely on the Bible, don’t trust any that want to come along and add to it, and rightfully so.
The Bible itself tells us that the foundation is the Apostles and prophets of their time, with Jesus as the cornerstone. When the apostles were done with their testimonies, their works were collected and compiled, and the era of the Holy Spirit began with Jesus death. It has continued. We have all we need. In fact, Joseph once believed that the BOM was all that Mormons would NEED, as he wrote that God told him that he should “pretend to no other gift”, than to translate the BOM. He then CHANGED that revelation after the fact. So how can we believe Jo Smith? We can’t, and this argument by Ralph is disingenuous and disproven by his own Mormon History.
Please everyone, check sources when Mormons throw them out. (They never do, so will just quote anyone they know nothing about). Here is some info on the author, Marcus Borg,
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2013/10/09/dear-marcus-borg-please-reconsider-the-resurrection/
He also doesn’t believe in a physical resurrection of Jesus… Of course our Mormon poster would use a scholar like this to bolster his claims, which also undermines Mormons claims as well. Go figure. The sheer stupidity of such tactics never ceases to amaze me. And, of course, there is no page # or anything else for this quote. That means, my friends, that Viking is just cutting and pasting from articles that suit his fancy, not anything he has actually read. Nice try, dude, but we’re not buying what you are selling, (if you even know what you are selling, which I doubt.)
Ralph,
You put more faith in your Mormon prophets than you do in God, and I can see why. You believe that there are millions perhaps billions of gods in the universe, all of whom were once men on various planets and by being obedient to the LDS system, became gods.
It’s very easy, thus, to see why you don’t hold the Bible in very high esteem. You have sinful men becoming gods. They are not perfect so why should the Word of God be perfect?
This is how we differ Ralph. I believe there is One God who is totally omnipotent and omniscient. I believe that He has control over His Word and the revelation contained there in. You don’t! You need additional scripture and revelation from an incomplete god who is constantly evolving and progressing in knowledge.
The revelation received by your prophet Brigham Young from the Mormon god is today jettisoned by the LDS authorities but not the FLDS. Brigham Young claimed that the words he preached were as good as any scripture and you don’t even believe what he taught.
Is it any wonder that you choose to reject God’s Word as revealed? In it, God reveals Himself but your prophets have revealed a different god. Given that you accept these false prophets, you must reject the Bible and God as He is revealed there in. To accept God’s Word as revealed, you would then have to reject the Mormon prophets and the Mormon gods.
So there’s your choice Ralph and for some reason you’d rather follow a man with a magic rock who promised you could become a god. That’s a bad choice. I feel sorry for you and your family who you are leading to eternal spiritual destruction.
Ralph,
Please take a moment to read at least the first part of this comment. You gave what may seem like good reasons for your point. I have heard LDS lament that critics would not deal with their actual arguments for their LDS beliefs, but people would just talk over each others heads or “at”each other. Perhaps, Ralph, you have thought the same.
Well this is your chance to receive a full response dealing with the actual points of your arguments. I offer a two paragraph summary in case you are not willing to read all of my reply. The rest is a line by line analysis and response to the very points of your arguments. If you are sincere in your arguments and apparent desire to defend and communicate the validity of your beliefs and the teachings of your church, then you will read everything I have written here. If you are a sincere believer in your church’s teachings about learning then you will want to read the line by line analysis as it will help you to argue and communicate more effectively in the future.
Summary reply:
Your first statements don’t clarify “EVERY WORD” and your arguments all rely on this idea. The idea of men living on “every word”of God can’t mean that we must have every word of God. Mormons simply can’t use this as fact, the Book of Mormon does not have all of God’s words either. Simply because we don’t have all does not mean what we have is suspect, nor does it mean we are not alive, nor does it mean that God wants us to have more than we do. Not explaining and just using this verse as is is rendered insufficient by reality (no one has all of God’s words). Your specific reference to a “missing book” from Collosians does not indicate anything other than the letter to the Laodiceans was to be read. There is no indication that it was to be included in the Bible, that it was scripture, or even pronounced by God; for all we do know, it was just something Paul wanted communicated- policy, perhaps?
The line by line analysis below clearly shows how your arguments are invalid and thus completely ineffective. But even if they have some value it works far greater against Mormonism and its scriptures than it does Christianity and the Bible. While your arguments here attempt to bring evidence that books are missing from the Bible, and fail, we know there are (at least, what is believed by Mormons to be) words of God missing from Mormon scriptures: the unsealed portion of the Book of Mormon as well as the translation of the plates of Lehi (the lost 116 pages and more) and we know from extant copies of the Book of Commandments that whole sections of supposed words of God were deleted from the original revelations when they were reproduced in the Doctrine and Covenants.
So while your arguments fail to show that anything is missing from the Bible that was supposed to be there, the ideas behind your arguments, from a Mormon perspective, show that the known evidence of missing words of God from Mormon scripture is a problem indeed.
In the end, Ralph, you are trying to set a standard for scripture that is not even realistic let alone necessary and then trying to force it on people who believe God has preserved what he wanted us to have, and even worse, you prove Mormonism guilty of your criticism for its ample and clear evidence of missing revelation and book.
_______________________
Line by line formal reconstruction of your arguments
I. Intro
1) Man is to live by every word of God
2) If:
A) a book is referenced in the Bible
And
B) the book came from the mouth of God
Then, it should be considered scripture
And
The Bible is incomplete without it.
II. Specific example stressed:
1) scripture says Letter to Collosians was to be read by Collosians
2) scripture says letter to Laodiceans was to be read by Collosians
3) Collosians were “required” to read letter to laodiceans
4) 3 gives Laodicean letter “an importance just as the epistle to the Collosians was important.”
5) If:
A) the Collosians letter was included in the Bible
And
B) the Laodicean letter was just as important (as the Collosian)
Then, Laodicean too should be included in the Bible.
Summary:
1) This (and other) references show that we are missing some of God’s words.
2) So, if:
A) We are to live by every word from the mouth of God,
Then,
B) we should know the Bible is lacking somewhat.
Analysis of your arguments
I.
1. Requires some interpretation: every written word or every spoken word or both, live causally or ethically or both?
2. B is sufficient for being considered scripture, A is neither necessary nor actually helpful at all (reference does not in any way indicate status)
2 conclusion does not follow from the premises, even if some thing is scripture (bc it is words of God) it does not necessarily mean it must be included in the Bible (it would be nice but not necessary). Even if mentioned in the Bible it is not necessary.
II.
1 and 2 are facts
3 is not a equal restatement of 2: being told to read it (2) is not the same as being “required” to read it (claim of 3)
[This is sufficient for the argument to be discarded as unsound, however the same unjustified substitution error is committed again immediately following]
4. Seems a reasonable, although modest, claim from the facts: each letter had “an importance”of its own.
5. B is not an equal restatement of 4: one letter having an importance and another letter having an importance does not mean that they have the same importance.
Conclusion: is not valid bc neither 3 nor 5b are valid, simply because a letter has “an importance” (that it was to be read) does not mean it had the same importance as the other letter that was included in the Bible- this example does not indicate that the letter to the Laodiceans was the word of God and thus says nothing to the conclusion that it must be included in any collection of scripture, including the Bible.
[Conclusion: this reference in the Bible says nothing to the point that the Bible is missing something it is supposed to have.]
III.
1 has not been shown to be true from the previous arguments.
2a is never really addressed in these arguments, never explicated, clarified, or even addressed
2b does not follow from anything said here as every argument used was invalid for false premises.
Note: the only sentences not included in this analysis are two or three from the second paragraph. They did not constitute arguments, the first is an unsupported claim and the following are at best truisms and, worse, unsupported claims.
_________________________
Ralph’s original post for easier reference:
Jesus taught that “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” (emphasis mine). If there are books referenced in the Bible that came from the mouth of God, then these too should be classed as scripture. This means that the Bible is incomplete without those books. Especially since one of the references states – “And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.” (Collosians 4:16) The church in Collosians were REQUIRED to read the epistle that was sent to Laodicea, giving it an importance just as the epistle to the Collosians was important. If the epistle to the Collosians was included in the Bible and the other epistle was just as important then it too should be included.
So to say that the Bible is complete is ridiculous, the books in it were chosen by a group of people and they decided when they had enough. It does not mean that there are not any other books out there that are not scripture (ie separate from the Bible like the BoM) or should not be included in the Bible (ie the books referred to in the Bible that are missing from it). These references do show that we are missing some of the words that God gave to man, and if we need to live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God then we need to keep in mind the Bible is lacking somewhat.I I
Hello Falcon
I am still here. Do you realize how huge the universe is? There is a God that rules over all this and how insignificant we are? We may see God differently but He still commands our respect.
I happened to come across a copy of the epistle to the laodiceans. You can find it at reluctant-messen
ger.com. What amazes me is this.
The Epistle to the Laodiceans is included in all 18 German Bibles printed prior to Luther’s translation, beginning with the first German Bible, issued by Johann Mental at Strassburg in 1488. In these the Pauline Epistles, with the Epistle to the Hebrews, immediately follow the Gospels, with Laodiceans standing between Galatians and Ephesians. In the first Czech (Bohemian) Bible, published at Prague in 1488 and reprinted several times in the 16th and 17th centuries, Laodiceans follows Colossians and precedes I Thessalonians.
How it got in the German and Czech Bibles and why it was there into the 17th century is a puzzles to me.
There is not that much to the epistle but you might want to look at it.
We’re sitting around a table, or in a coffee shop, or where ever, and we’re having this discussion (‘The Mormon logic of lost books and its implication for prophetic accountability’) ….
This my visual of what I thought happens on this blog site, and I have posted here before and things have always been reasonably copasetic in an informal, amicable way. However, this time during this ‘discussion’ (again the ‘visual’) I say what I said (initially), finishing my comment with a nonchalant “just saying”. Okay, everyone hears what I say. Someone might shrug his or hers shoulders, someone might just say, “Mmm…” And someone might say, “Nah, I don’t think that’s really accurate. For example, …. yada, yada, yada….” Anyway, I would have expected that the course of our discussion (‘sitting around’ this blog post together in an amicable way ) might have been something a lot less mean-spirited, or certainly not being accosted like I was and now even being compared to a ‘drive-by’ murderer type of person.
Why the vitriol? And and top of that even assume I’m a Mormon, or a liberal, or an atheist or whomever or whatever? Regardless, do you really think ALL Christians have the same views an opinions in reference to Biblical historicity? If I think one way and you think another and someone else thinks still another way, but we are all believer’s in Christ, what’s the big deal and especially, like I mentioned, the reason for the caustic, rude, and vitriolic responses?
If I have misconstrued something here, then I would be interested in knowing what that is.
P.S. About the dates of the various books in the NT: I only know what I read, and what I have read not all authors are in agreement with one another. I’m just the messenger. I’m ‘just saying’.
Hey all,
I think the Mormons among us would benefit from understanding how the cannon is recognized by the people of God
Ralph said
So to say that the Bible is complete is ridiculous, the books in it were chosen by a group of people and they decided when they had enough.
I say,
That group of people is the universal Church made up of billions of faithful blood bought Christians on their knees all through the ages.
Theses people while lead by the Holy Sprint asked and continue to ask the following questions of any book claiming to be NT scripture. (the OT canon was determined directly by Jesus )
1) Was it authored either by an apostle or by someone of close association with the apostles?
2) Does it correspond with the elements of other canonical books and hold no trace of opinions not recognized in Scripture and have the person and work of Jesus Christ as its central subject?
3 ) Is it universally accepted by the people of God?
4) Is it inspired (God breathed)?
Any book claiming to to be scripture must be able to answer each of those four questions affirmatively. Books that do not make the cut are rejected by us it is that simple.
It was true in the fourth century and is still true today.
That is why books like The BOM and the so called “Epistle to the Laodiceans” will never be scripture. No matter how much wanna be authorities would like to impose them on the church
It’s not rocket science and it’s not some dark ancient conspiracy.
It’s nothing less than God speaking directly to his people.
quote:
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
(Joh 10:27)
end quote:
peace
Clyde6070, the following is the wikipedia article on the pseudepigraphical letter you speak of:
The Latin Vulgate Epistle to the Laodiceans
—————————————————-
For centuries some Western Latin Bibles used to contain a small Epistle from Paul to the Laodiceans. The oldest known Bible copy of this epistle is in a Fulda manuscript written for Victor of Capua in 546. It is mentioned by various writers from the fourth century onwards, notably by Pope Gregory the Great, to whose influence may ultimately be due the frequent occurrence of it in Bibles written in England; for it is commoner in English Bibles than in others. John Wycliffe included Paul’s letter to the Laodiceans in his Bible translation from the Latin to English. However this epistle is not without controversy because there is no evidence of a Greek text.
A letter entitled Epistle to the Laodiceans, consisting of 20 short lines, is found in some editions of the Vulgate, which is a Latin translation from Greek. It is almost unanimously believed to be pseudepigraphical, being a pastiche of phrases taken from the genuine Pauline epistles.[14] It contains almost no doctrine, teachings, or narrative not found elsewhere, and its exclusion from the Biblical canon has little effect.
The text was almost unanimously considered pseudepigraphal when Biblical canon was decided upon, and does not appear in any Greek copies of the Bible at all, nor is it known in Syriac or other versions.[15] Jerome, who wrote the Latin Vulgate translation, wrote in the 4th century, “it is rejected by everyone”[16] and included it in the Vulgate, which is the reason for translating the letter into Latin. However, it evidently gained a certain degree of respect. It appeared in over 100 surviving early Latin copies of the Bible. According to Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatum versionem, there are Latin Vulgate manuscripts containing this epistle dating between the 6th and 12th century, including Latin manuscripts F (Codex Fuldensis), M, Q, B, D (Ardmachanus), C, and Lambda.
The apocryphal epistle is generally considered a transparent attempt to supply this supposed lost sacred document. Some scholars suggest that it was created to offset the popularity of the Marcionite epistle.[2]
Wilhelm Schneemelcher’s standard work, New Testament Apocrypha (Chapter 14 Apostolic Pseudepigrapha) includes a section on the Latin Epistle to the Laodiceans and a translation of the Latin text.[17]
clyde,
Have you become a lurker? That’s OK. The more you come here and read, the more we have a chance to provide for you the pathway to salvation through the One and Only God of the universe and his Christ. As to what you wrote:
“We may see God differently but He still commands our respect.”
What exactly are you saying here clyde? It sorts of sounds like the definition of “God” used in Alcoholics Anonymous and other twelve step programs. That’s the god as being whoever a person conceives of him being.
God is not happy with gods as they are conceived by men. This is what the Mormons gods are. They are gods conceived by a man, Joseph Smith. These are not gods we are required to respect. In fact, we should disrespect them because they seek to take away from God, His glory, that only He deserves.
This is not an “any old god will do” scenario clyde. This is why being sincere and devout in one’s beliefs doesn’t qualify in terms of salvation. In order to be saved, a person must come to recognize God and His Christ and put faith in Him.
You need to get your head straight on this clyde. Your eternal destiny depends on it.
What exactly do Mormons think are in these “lost” books of the Bible?
Is there anything, they suppose, that is in there that would contradict the revelation as it stands now? What could be added to what we know as revealed by God through His prophets?
We know that God, has a vested interest in the Bible carrying His revelation accurately. So God has this interest and He has the power to see that His will is done. He gave His Holy Spirit to the Church and He said that the gates of hell would not prevail against (His Church).
So the Mormon notion that there is more to be revealed within these “lost ” books of the Bible is curious indeed. The way Mormons use this lost book scenario is to then to add to or change what God has revealed. Who has an interest in propagating another gospel as it is presented by groups like the Jehovah Witnesses or Mormons?
It’s obvious that a changed gospel will not provide for mankind the salvation that God intended. When someone comes along and claims to have had visions and revelations that then alter or totally change what God has revealed, we know who the author is. We are in a spiritual battle. Paul explains it well in his letter to the Ephesians.
Mormons would do themselves a favor by going back to the Bible and believing what is revealed. Additional “scripture” that doesn’t support what was originally revealed, is a losing proposition.
Mistaken Testimony,
Do I need to remind you, a former LDS, of – We believe the Bible to be the Word of God as far as it is translated correctly?
Then there is also –
And
There is nowhere in our teachings that the Bible is, as you put it, “the word of Satan”.
Spartacus,
You said – “even if some thing is scripture (bc it is words of God) it does not necessarily mean it must be included in the Bible (it would be nice but not necessary)”. Does this mean that you believe that there are other things out there that are the Word of God and can be classed as scripture but are not included in the Bible? Because that is what this statement sound like you’re saying.
Fifth Monarchy Man
Can you please show me the proof that Jesus choose the OT, I have never heard that claim and it interests me.
The Church is made up of ‘billions’? When the final Biblical canon was decided on there were not billions in the Christian church. The only debate about what is supposed to be Biblical or not now when there is most likely ‘billions’ is just about the Apocrypha, nothing new as this debate has been going on for centuries. It was well back in the period between the second and fourth centuries as far as I remember, unless someone can tell me a more exact time period.
For all,
If I reference a paper in my research that has directly affected my research, it has become part of the canon of that research area. If my paper is then referenced my paper is also then part of the canon of that research area. The referencing indicates what is missing from the paper I have written that assisted me in making my conclusions to follow the research I did in that area. Any referenced paper is part of the full research I did even if I did not re-write the paper into my paper. That is how I see these ‘lost books’ of the Bible, they are referenced so they are part of the canon.
It appears to me that you think the Bible has been set and that is it even if there is more out there that can be classed as scripture, it just cannot belong in the Bible, as Spartacus indicates.
I have had someone on this site tell me that we don’t need to believe in the Bible to be saved, we just need to believe in Jesus. If this is the case then why worry what is in the Bible?
When I read the initial comment by Viking I did’nt get the idea he was trying to undermine the
christian belief relative to the inspiration of the books of the Bible . It was more of a off the cuff
type comment . Perhaps I am wrong about this but it underscores the importance of asking him
or anyone what they exactly mean by a certain comment they may make etc . I’m not going to
comment on this any further , so onto more important business , namely , dismantling Ralph’s
strained reasoning concerning the ” lost books ” of the Bible .
The way most Mormons have been taught to embrace this “lost books” argument is truly a
diversion tactic used by their leaders to convince sincere LDS that the Bible is as Ralph said,
” lacking ” something , i.e. there’s not enough information in it ( missing books ) there’s more
that as he stated ” should be included ” in it . This reasoning causes a Mormon to think that the
Bible is anemic , to read it a person will not learn enough who God/Jesus are and how to be
saved . Together with the Mormon doctrine that Christianity died off soon after the death of
Jesus’ apostles is how Mormon leaders attempt to convince people that they have the answer
to this problem and why after 1700 years of salvation being unavailable to man until a Mormon
named Joseph Smith arrived on the scene claiming he is directed by God to solve the problem .
This Mormon idea of a complete apostasy undergirds their faulty notion of why the Bible
does not contain the full gospel of salvation . Evil men defeated the Body of Christ and evil men
defeated His Word relative to His gospel of salvation , so embracing the truths in the Bible will
short change a person where salvation is concerned since not enough information about God
and what is necessary to receive salvation has been lost because of ” missing” / ” lost ” books .
This is the theory promulgated by Mormon leaders . It’s unfortunate that people
buy into it and proceed to follow these false prophets of the latter days .
Double standard ?
Mormon apostle Russell Ballard stated in Conf of Oct 1999 concerning the Book of Mormon :
” It was written anciently for our day ….preserved for the benefit of us who live in this
dispensation of the fullness of times .”
That’s what christians believe about the Bible ! Yet the Bible is not able to provide enough
information to enable a sinner to know, be forgiven by , and receive eternal life from , God ?
Ridiculous .
But wait . Does’nt the Book of Mormon contain references about prophets the writings of whom
are not all available today within it’s covers — missing books/ writings that should be in there ?
I guess the only answer to this is to believe that the Book of Mormon also does’nt contain enough
of Jesus’ gospel of salvation in order for a person to know who God rightly is and what they
must do in order to be reconciled to Him and receive the fullness of eternal life .
Mormon leaders can’t be trusted to offer Jesus’ true gospel . The preserved ” ancient scriptures ”
they have offer are soon too anemic to reveal enough about God and embrace for full salvation .
The Mormon people have been misled , detoured by latter days apostles not endorsed by Jesus
contsequently sincere people have been short changed from knowing the true God and the
gospel of salvation His apostles spread to all they encountered — Rom 1:16 ; Col 1: 20-23 .
THAT preaching was preserved by God down through the centuries because it is will that
people be saved — 2Pt 3 :9 ; 1Tim 2:4 .
Mistaken Testimony , not to be side tracked ( or picky ) but when you said , ” At least Jw’s
say that they are not christians ” , that comment needs clarification because they do say
such about themselves . They prefer to be known as ” Jehovah’s witnesses ” , but it’s not
uncommon in their publications for them to say they are ” the true christians ” ; ” the true
christian organization ” ; and even , Jehovah’s christian witnesses ” . All other churches
and their members constitute the system of false worship today and will all be destroyed
by God should Armageddon start tomorrow ( it’s always said to be ” just around the corner ” ) .
Ralph,
You wrote:
“I have had someone on this site tell me that we don’t need to believe in the Bible to be saved, we just need to believe in Jesus. If this is the case then why worry what is in the Bible?”
First of all, here we have one of your famous “someone told me” claims of which you are so fond. Someone told me that Mormons eat babies in their temple ceremonies. Come on Ralph. What’s the “someone told me” worth? Nothing!
More to the point however. When a Christian gives their testimony it’s all centered on Jesus Christ and how the person came to faith in Him securing eternal life.
When a Mormon gives their testimony, what do they testify to? Well it’s Joseph Smith, the BoM, the LDS church, the Mormon prophet and then tag lined on the end, someone Mormons call Jesus who bears no resemblance to the Jesus revealed in the Bible.
Faith in the Bible as an object isn’t going to get anyone saved. Faith in what the Bible reveals, will get a person saved. A Christian has confidence/faith that the Bible is God’s revealed Word. The Bible tells the story.
So do you see the difference?
Look at what is written in Luke 24: 25-27. Look particularly at Luke 24:27.
Who is the object of our praise and adoration? It’s Jesus. He’s who I worship. I don’t worship the Bible.
I think it should be obvious to you why it’s important that we Christians defend the Bible, its inspiration and inerrancy. It’s our standard for our faith. If there is no standard then anything goes and you end up with a religion like Mormonism; a hodge podge of doctrines and teachings that can’t be nailed down.
See what you’ve got in Mormonism, because you won’t accept the Bible and view it as corrupted, is a bunch of loose cannon prophets who come up with all sorts of weird off-the-wall doctrines that bear no resemblance to God’s revealed Word. Mormonism is a free-for-all of convoluted speculation.
Ralph, you have more faith in Joseph Smith, the BoM, the LDS church and the current prophet than you do in Jesus. I hope you wise-up at some point and realize that the religious system you’re so invested in is false and can’t do anything for you but keep you busy.
Ralph,
I have to say I’m disappointed with your response. I showed your arguments invalid and even devastating to Mormonism and your only response is asking an irrelevant question and giving a nonequivalent analogy.
Obviously, in a research paper all sources that inform the content of the paper is part of the research pool that made that paper and if your paper is subsumed in another then it is all part of the research pool that you are likening to canon. But that’s just it, there is nothing about a book of the Bible mentioning a letter that indicates any kind of relationship let alone that they are equal or that one was informed by the other, nothing; it is a mention, nothing more until further evidence is available. This would also be known as self-serving conjecture. This is all part of your attempt to find/assume that books were meant to be in the Bible.
But, again, we know the plates of Lehi were originally meant to be translated as part of the scripture that Joseph was bringing forth. We know that whole sentences and ideas were removed from the revelations between the Book of Commandments and the modern edition of it, Doctrine and Covenants.
And lastly your whole “every word”premise is undermined by (or undermines) the Book of Mormon which is not a translation of all the holy writings of the Nephite people or all of the research sources of the plates. The Book of Mormon itself says that it is an “abridgment” of the actual books of Nephi, Jared, etc.!
Your question to me is irrelevant because Christians believe the Bible is what God wants us to have. We believe He succeeded in preserving what He wanted us to have. Whether or not His words were ever written anywhere else is thus irrelevant. Obviously God could have had a ton written down that was not included in the Bible. But, as I said, this still does not mean it was ever meant to be part of the Bible or any other collection and preservation of scripture. You realize that, except for the Gospels, the NT letters were letters with immediate purpose as intercommunication between the early Christians? Letters can have all kinds of purposes besides communicating to all people of all generations.
These are your rather convenient but tragic assumptions which you have not, and i think cannot be, supported. Convenient for trying to give even an opportunity for the Book of Mormon to be legit but tragic in that the very thing you want to legitimize is compromised instead.
Ralph,
You wrote:
Ralph,
Something tells me your going to say, the quote by you was said by me. I have heard LDS here on this blog say many times, we Christians worship the Bible, and we have said before, we dont worship the Bible we worship Jesus.
I suspect maybe I said that quote by you, and If it was not me, I could see it being me for this reason. If you read the Bible, in the NT Jesus said to the religious leaders, the scriptures testify of Me, He was talking about the OT, since the NT was not yet written.
Also the Bible it’s self does not save us, it is Jesus that saves us, and the Bible tells us, it’s faith in Jesus not faith in the Bible. People that were alive after Jesus ascended into Heaven, How were they saved? When the NT was not even written yet? They were not saved because of reading the Bible, it was faith in Jesus. What about people who cannot read? or are blind? These people cannot read, or what about people groups that live deep in the Jungles who do not have access to Bibles?
Then as far as Having faith in Jesus, it’s not just any Jesus, You cannot as I said before, create some being, or take a rock, or tree, or create something and call it Jesus. JS created a false Jesus and the jesus of Mormonism cannot save.
Ralph,
That is all LDS double-speak. Look at what these sources you gave said. “The revelations given to the Prophet Joseph bear record that the biblical story is essentially correct, although not complete.”
“Regardless of all its problems in the making, the Bible should not be disparaged in any way. It is the word of God, and even though translations have dimmed some of its meaning, and many ‘plain and precious parts’ have been deleted, it still is an inspired and miraculous guide to all who will read it.”
What the heck is the JST then? It is waaay more than just adding books that were removed, as the statement “although not complete” would to suggest. And to the LDS the truth is that the Bible as we currently have it today is not “the word of God,” but it actually was “the word of God.” I just really wished that your religion would not use this manipulative double-speak. The JST does not simply enhance a book that has “dimmed some of its meaning,” the JST does far more than that.
The LDS religion should stop playing this manipulative lip-service to the Bible. The LDS need to at the very least be upfront with themselves and unwaveringly proclaim from the rooftop that the JST is the Word of God, while the Bible is just a perverted version by the Devil of what once was. Be upfront about it. The LDS like to believe on one hand that the whore of the earth perverted the Bible by removing books and and by radically altering the text, while at the same time say that the Bible is the word of God. That is deceptive and manipulative to investigators.
If the JST is the pure word of God while the Holy Bible has been perverted by Satan (far more than GAs would have us believe as we see in the JST) then why hand out something that is not the pure word of God to investigators; why lead with that, unless you had a bait and switch sales pitch? At the very least be true to yourself and call the Bible what it is to your theology rather than speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
Ralph,
Your rational and your attempt to defend it concerning the Mormon argument of the ” lost books ”
of the New Testament , has been succinctly dismantled by those here who care for your soul.
Mormonism is not the answer Ralph .
You know, I must admit that for a fleeting moment I found myself getting exasperated with Ralph. But then, as usual, I remembered that Ralph thinks and processes information like a member of a cult does. It’s just the way these folks minds work. The idea is to protect the belief system at all costs. Walter Martin wrote, “Mormons are able to think logically in all areas of their lives but not when it comes to their religion.” This is especially so if a Mormon has had “spiritual” experiences that reinforce their belief systems.
Many, if not most, of our Christian posters here are former Mormons. They can relate to all of this in a first hand manner.
There’s hope for Ralph.
Remember, this is YOUR visual…
Actually, you are the one who told me,
And then proceeded to judge me for holding Smith accountable for his life and teachings. So amicable? I don’t think so. I gave a very long and detailed answer to your accusations against me and you ignored my responses.
Once again, YOUR visual. You are the only one here connecting the two metaphors. If you actually look up “drive by” in the Oxford Dictionary, it does have your definition, but it also has this one, (the one which was referred to in the post you object to)
This is what was meant by “drive-by” in that case. No reason to associate it with violence.
Really? Vitriol? Let’s go to the dictionary again:
I don’t think anyone here was being “cruel and bitter”, or dumped sulfuric acid on you.
I have to go on what you have said. You said you were a Mormon, but then extolled the Church for it’s values they instilled on you, and said that you didn’t think that Monson was THE “one and only” prophet, but didn’t say that he wasn’t a prophet. So, I’m not really sure where you stand, and your post about the New Testament Books is certainly out of many of our declared Mormon’s playbooks. You’re the one calling Jo Smith a genius, not me.
Nope, just as all who call themselves Christians may not really be Christians.
I already answered you about this, but obviously you didn’t read my response that I gave here. As for being caustic, or rude, or vitriolic, it seems that you should take your own advice that you gave to me, “I think we all need to be reminded to lighten up more, as well.” What I have seen (having moderated this blog for some years) is that when someone gets this touchy, they are being defensive because they got caught saying something they can’t back up.
What you have misconstrued is that the Christians here are going to accept your definition of a Christian as someone who just believes in Christ and does whatever they please:
This is simply naive or ignorant, and a cop out. For example, Brigham Young once said “Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood?” So is it ok to kill people if you think that you do so “with love”? That is what Brigham Young and Jo Smith taught. Christians have a defined set of rules and beliefs that we live by, found in the Bible. On the other hand you espouse that no one but God has to hold anyone accountable for what they say, and your protestations that we don’t have the right to hold Smith accountable seem a tad strident. As you said,
To each their own? Ok. That philosophy would then require you to just let everyone believe what they want. That defeats any purpose for even getting involved in a discussion and then judging people for what they say. So… why would you say that I am too “hung up” on Joseph Smith? To each their own, right? You are the one though, who seems to be hung up on him:
The problem is, none of what Smith taught is IN the Bible. And he DID change his mind about a lot of things. It is well DOCUMENTED. That is why I seriously doubt you have left Mormonism behind. You still defend what you still like about it. Fact is, it is all heretical nonsense. It seems to me that you can’t make up your mind what you believe. And that’s fine. But don’t come here and judge me and tell me not to hold Smith accountable for what he said and did and then try and act like I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to what Smith taught and did.
The problem is, that is NOT what you said or even implied. You said,
No qualifications here. None at all. This may be why we are being so critical. You’ve read Borg’s entire book? His other books? If so, why no page numbers? No author’s name? This is exactly what a lazy, drive-by post is. How can anyone take this seriously? If you know anything about the author, his views and beliefs, you would know why Mistaken said what he did, and why I called you on it. This post was either inept, or just condescending, which I have accused you of before, and rightly so. When people come here, and say that all they want is to be nice and amiable and get to know us, etc. but then make statements like, “please ponder it without ****-Mormon bias” and that there is more to God than what “run of the mill Christians” know, I’m skeptical of their motives.
Joseph Smith:
This is far from “essentially correct”. Nice try Ralph, but we’re not buying what you’re selling.
I guess this is worth a bit of a comment…
I ran a number of combinations of that Ralph, and came up blank. I did find this that was said though,
I am continually amazed at the amount of straw man arguments that you come up with. Really. How can anyone believe IN the Bible? Do Christians worship it? Pray to it? People believe what is written in the Bible. (Faith comes by hearing or in this case reading the Word of God) This is an old, old, Mormon straw man, and is really beneath anyone who is sincere.
Yea, so I’m the one that used and uses the “drive by” metaphor to describe a certain type of poster. Now come-on, only someone with extremely thin skin or an out-of-control persecution complex would relate that to being accused of being a “murder type person”. That sounds way too Mormon and tips me off that the person has run out of arguments. Actually in real life if I encountered someone like this I’d just walk away realizing that the discussion wasn’t going any where. grindael characterized the label and I would add that it’s used to identify someone who just wants to make a provocative comment and then run away. I think another term used on the internet is “troll”.
The whole point is to “encourage” the person to take this process seriously.
Falcon,
You said ”First of all, here we have one of your famous “someone told me” claims of which you are so fond.”
On April 27th In the blog “What’s in a name” you said “I remembered a few years back, I asked a TBM poster if he would kill or steal if ordered to by the “prophet”. He said, yes, he would kill or steal if ordered to do so by the “prophet”.” Isn’t this a ‘someone told me” claim? You admitted to me later that you didn’t actually remember who said it, it wasn’t just a case of not wanting to name anyone.
Then RickB said in the post “When it comes to the plates, there was no miracle” – “I’m always asking the question about reformed Egyptian, I once had one Mormon come here, I think it was Ralph, claiming it does exist and none of us know what were talking about” Another “someone told me” comment, but this time he tried to put a name to it, albeit an incorrect one. I never made that claim, but I do remember another member making it.
Why shoot me when many of us on this site are guilty of doing it?
Grindael,
I may have mixed up another blog site with this one, but I have had an Evangelical Christian make the comment that we don’t need to believe in the Bible to be saved. I do know that there are many older posts on this site that have lost their replies, it could also have been in one of those posts that is lost. I have tried looking for past post responses and came up with this problem. That may also be why you can’t find it.
RickB, I do not believe that it was you who said it. I don’t think the person is on this site anymore.
Ralph,
I honestly don’t remember saying that I didn’t remember who said it. To my recollection, I’ve always known who said it. It was one of those moments that sent a shock through me that someone would actually be that compliant to a false religious leader. So please provide some form of evidence that I said I didn’t know who said it. The only thing I can figure is that I must have had short term amnesia because to my knowledge, I always attribute that to you.
I think it was more likely that I didn’t want to pound you with it all though you deserve to be pounded with it since it’s such a ludicrous and dangerous mind set. The fact that you would blindly follow these LDS leaders is beyond scary to me. It’s what led to the Mountain Meadows Massacre and the avenger that Joseph Smith had at his disposal or the men who wrecked William Law’s printing press.
Ralph,
The only posts that get deleted are if they break some kind of rule. I doubt that one did. There are no “lost” posts otherwise. There are 2,421 pages of posts for this site. I can easily search them all, and it’s not there. Now, you may have heard it somewhere, but it is not here. If you can’t remember the person, or where you heard it from, I have doubts that you are even remembering it correctly. And again, it is a straw man argument. Christians don’t believe IN the Bible as an object of worship, etc. That is ridiculous and only made up by those who are trying to score some kind of points and use strawman tactics. You dwelling on this, instead of responding to what it would actually mean (if said) speaks volumes.
Ralph, yup. Understand what Grindael is saying: the Bible is not the saving mechanism and therefore we do not believe in it as we believe in Christ Jesus, who is the saving mechanism. The Bible is a tool given us so that we can come to know God who saves. In that sense, we do not believe in the Bible. We do believe it to be the written word of God, breathed by him to his people who captured it for us to have now. Because it is literally God breathed, we find it reliable and of huge importance. Yet still, we do not believe in it as we do Christ. As such, we don’t worship it as we worship God.
If someone told you we do not believe in the Bible, that is almost certainly what was meant by it.
Is this another example of a Mormon using words in a different sense than we do? One of my biggest criticisms of Mormons is their lack of understanding of Christianity all the while complaining of how Christians misunderstand them.
Let’s put this to rest. Ralph did say that he would obey the prophet if he was ordered to, and Falcon repeated that RALPH SAID SO, many times. Here is where Ralph first does so,
I told you I could find anything with the right parameters, Ralph. Posts just don’t disappear. You just don’t know where to look, or it is not there. And, Falcon attributed that quote to you a number of times, here in 2008, and here also, and here (2009), and here in 2012. Notice Ralph’s reply to Falcon, where he repeats it again…
I find it hard to believe that Falcon would say to Ralph that he didn’t remember who said it, when he repeated it four of five times in as many years. For instance, here Falcon repeats it and doesn’t give your name, but doesn’t say he doesn’t REMEMBER who said it…
Once again Ralph, your memory seems rather faulty. Is this an ongoing condition? Perhaps you need some medical help?
Hey Ralph,
you said,
Can you please show me the proof that Jesus choose the OT, I have never heard that claim and it interests me.
Quote:
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.
(Luk 24:27)
end quote:
notice it says “all the Scriptures”,……
There were no Scriptures that were “lost” in this first Bible Study of the New Covenant era. Jesus utilized an infallible OC cannon completely in front of the Disciples who were there.
You said
The Church is made up of ‘billions’? When the final Biblical canon was decided on there were not billions in the Christian church.
I say,
The Cannon was not decided it is recognized. It was recognized in the early church it is recognized the same way today.
You say,
The only debate about what is supposed to be Biblical or not now when there is most likely ‘billions’ is just about the Apocrypha, nothing new as this debate has been going on for centuries.
I say,
There was never any debate about the cannon. The Cannon was decided infallibly by God. We just recognize that decision. Because we are tainted by sin we lean on the testimony of our brothers and sisters of all ages to confirm what we already know.
You say,
It was well back in the period between the second and fourth centuries as far as I remember, unless someone can tell me a more exact time period.
I say,
There was no time when the cannon was undecided. NT books were scripture as soon as they were written.
You do know The Da Vinchi is fiction don’t you?
peace
Ralph using the OT as precedence for killing people is horrific. There is NO precedent in the New Testament for such actions. You have got to be kidding me. Slitting people’s throats? How utterly depraved and disgusting that any so called Christian would seek to justify murder by God at the order of men. You need help Ralph. Serious help.