I posted this back in Jan of (06) And no one has been able to take it up and give an honest answer. I even posted it on another Blog and the only reply from an LDS person was, I could reply I just do not want to. I told her she was a liar and could not that was why she did not. I showed it to a Mormon Missionary I was sharing with, him and his partner could not answer it, so here it is again for any one who has not seen it. I am posting it again because I was told I would get the answers I am looking for. Rick b
In the Original 1958 Edition to the Book Mormon Doctrine By Bruce R.McConkie He states In the Preface:
This Work on Mormon Doctrine Is unique--the first book of it's kind ever published.
It is the first major attempt to digest, explain, and analyze all of the important doctrines of the kingdom.
It is the first extensive compendium of the whole gospel--the first attempt to publish an encyclopedic commentary covering the whole field of revealed religion.
True, there are many Bible commentaries, dictionaries, and encyclopedias; but they all abound in apostate, sectarian notions. Also, there are many sound gospel texts on special subjects.
But never before has a comprehensive attempt been made to define and outline, in a brief manner, all of the basic principles of salvation--and to do it from the perspective of all revelation, both ancient and modern.
This work on Mormon Doctrine is designed to help persons seeking salvation to gain that knowledge of God and his laws without which they cannot hope for an inheritance in the celestial city.
Since it is impossible foe a man to be saved in ignorance of God and his laws and since a man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge of Jesus Christ and the plan of salvation, it follows that men are obligated at their peril to learn and apply the true doctrines of the gospel.
this gospel compendium will enable men, more effectively, to "teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom"; to "be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law of the gospel,in all things that pertain unto the kingdom of God, that are expedient" for them "to understand." (D and C 88:77-7
For the work itself, I assume sole and full responsibility. Observant students, however, will note that the four standard works of the Church are the chief sources of authority quoted and that literally tens of thousands of scriptural quotations and citations are woven into the text material.
Where added explanations and interpretations were deemed essential, they have been taken from such recognized doctrinal authorities as Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, Orson Pratt, John Taylor, and Joseph Fielding Smith.
Two persons have been particularly helpful in the actual preparation of the work: 1. Velma Harvey, my very able and competent secretary, who with unbounded devotion and insight has typed manuscripts, checked references, proofread, and worked out many technical details; and 2. Joseph Fielding Smith , Jr., my brother in law, who both set the type and made many valuable suggestions as to content and construction.
Abundant needed and important counsel has also come from Milton R. Hunter, my colleague on the First Council of the Seventy; Marvin Wallin, of Bookcraft; and Thomas S. Moson, of the deseret News Press. Salt Lake City, Utah June 1, 1958 --Bruce R. McConkie.
Keep in mind Bruce stated He looks to people Like Joseph Smith and Bringham Young as recognized doctrinal authorities. So with that in mind, Is a Challenge as it were, Issued By Bruce R.McConkie.
I have read all 4 standard works. I find nothing at all in the Book of Mormon to prove it is inspired by God as LDS claim. Bruce states we can find hundreds of topics, I would like to issue a Challenge to all my Latter-day saint friends to bring forth just 10 topics of your choice, compare them to the Bible and show me how they are a more accurate display of the Gospel. Please keep in mind, I am following Acts 17:11 and 1st peter 3:15. Then after you read Bruce's Challenge, I lovingly added a list of things That LDS feel are core doctrine yet cannot be found in the BoM. This matter has everlasting eternal consequences. sincerely Rick b.
In the Book Mormon Doctrine By Bruce R. McConkie, under the title Book of Mormon.
bruce says the Purpose of the book of mormon is this.
1. To bear record of Christ, certifying in plainness and with clarity of his divine sonship and mission, proving irrefutably that he is the Redeemer and Saviour.
2. To teach the doctrines of the gospel in such a pure and perfect way that the plan of salvation will be clearly revealed; and
3. To stand as a witness to all the world that Joseph Smith was the Lord's anointed through whom the foundation was laid for the great latter-day work of restoration. Almost all of the doctrines of the gospel are taught in the Book of Mormon with much greater clarity and perfection than those same doctrines are revealed in the Bible. Anyone who will place in parallel columns the teachings of these two great books on such subjects as the atonement, plan of salvation, gathering of Israel, baptism, gifts of the spirit, miracles, revelation, faith, Charity, ( or ANY of a HUNDRED OTHER SUBJECTS), will find conclusive proof of the superiority of the Book of Mormon teachings.
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that Elohim (God the Father in Mormonism) was once a mortal man and that he was not always God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God has a body of flesh and bones?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that men can become Gods?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that temple participation is necessary to become exalted?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach the blood of Christ does not cleanse certain sins?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say there is more than one God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say males must hold either the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that there are "three degrees of glory"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Hi Rick,
I hope the challenge generates some good honest discussion.
I hope that you will be rested and relaxed even with your busy schedule.
My revision materials are coming along...
Russ
Hi Rick B,
You now have competition with my new blog link...Rick T.
I hope you are well/better.
Russ;)
Rick T
Hello.
First, I would like to apologyze for my comments on the Mormon Coffee thread. I do understand how my little parable did not quite fit the circomstances. My posts were rude, and I should not have said what I said.
I will now start to answer the challenge. Understand that to give ten points, and explain them, would take a long time. To fully explain even one would take several pages. In this post I will give only a brief explanation of one, and will give the rest in further posts.
THE FALL OF MAN
From the Bible we know certain things concerning this. We know the actual events, as recorded in Genesis three. We know that Adam and Eve were innocent, not having a knowledge of Good and Evil until after they ate of the fruit. We know that by their fall sin and death entered the world. We know that it was caused through subtlety and beguiling. In 1 Timothy 2: 14 we are told that Adam was not in the transgression.
This is what we know. As it leaves many questions there are more than one belief concerning the event. The biggest question is "Was this part of God's plan?" The Bible does not explicitly answer this.
So, we could say that it wasn't, as why would God want such a fate for his children? However, this brings in the dilema that satan then defeated God. Not permanantly, but he did disrupt the plans of God, which makes God no longer all powerful.
Or we can say that it was part of his plan, but than you have God setting up Adam and Eve and thus sin is braught by the act of God, taking away his perfection.
This is the most important question to answer, and it is answered in the Book of Mormon, in the second chapter of 2 Nephi. It tells us that it was needed, and it was part of God's plan. It then answers the problem of bringing sin into the world.
Verse 11 of the stated chapter says "For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility."
There had to this opposition. Adam and Eve were meant to fulfill the righteous plans of God, but in their current state they were unable to do either righteous or wicked acts. Thus God made it possible for them to chose.
It is also true that God gave the command so that when they did eat of the tree he would be justified in thrusting them from the garden. If they had not been commanded the opposition between the tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge would have still existed and they would have still eaten, but God would not have been able to thrust them out.
Thus we see there was an opposition in what tempted them, as well as an opposition in what they were supposed to do.
This is not everything concerning the FAll, but it is enough to demonstrate what the challenge asks for.
Shematwater,
You gave an answer, But I do not agree with it and I do not see it being able to be supported in the Bible.
Shem said I will now start to answer the challenge. Understand that to give ten points, and explain them, would take a long time. To fully explain even one would take several pages. In this post I will give only a brief explanation of one, and will give the rest in further posts.
Please feel free to post as much as you want, I will reply as I get time.
Shem said The biggest question is "Was this part of God's plan?" The Bible does not explicitly answer this.
So, we could say that it wasn't, as why would God want such a fate for his children? However, this brings in the dilema that satan then defeated God. Not permanantly, but he did disrupt the plans of God, which makes God no longer all powerful.
I have to disagree with this since The Bible clearly tells us God is ALL KNOWING and ALL POWERFUL.
God Knew this was going to happen before it happened, and the Bible tells us that after God rebuked Adam, Eve, and Lucifer he Told Adam and Eve that their redemption would come some day, this was not an after thought. God knew very well what he was going to do.
Read these 1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, [as] silver and gold, from your vain conversation [received] by tradition from your fathers;
1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
In Rev 13:8 it states the Lamb, Who we know from Scripture is Jesus, He was slain before the Foundation of the World. So God knew what would happen, and had a plan all along.
Shem said
Or we can say that it was part of his plan, but than you have God setting up Adam and Eve and thus sin is braught by the act of God, taking away his perfection.
Shem, I believe God knew it was going to happen because He knows everything, But Even though He knew it would happen does not make it a set up on His part. But at the same time, according to your Logic, then I guess your God cannot be perfect because, According to LDS believe, it was Gods plan for Adam and Eve to Fall.
Funny how you go on to say it was Gods Plan and the BoM teaches this, you said This is the most important question to answer, and it is answered in the Book of Mormon, in the second chapter of 2 Nephi. It tells us that it was needed, and it was part of God's plan.
So According to the BoM it was Gods plan for man to Fall, So that means it was Gods plan then for women to be raped, children forced into Child porn and Gay sex with adult men, it was Gods plan for people to kill on mass scales in War or even murder on a one on one scale. All the evils in the world that man commits are then Gods fault if it really was part of Gods plan.
Please support this from the Bible.
Shem says, There had to this opposition. Adam and Eve were meant to fulfill the righteous plans of God, but in their current state they were unable to do either righteous or wicked acts. Thus God made it possible for them to chose.
This cannot be true, First off it is not taught in the Bible, Second, if They disobeyed God, then that means they did do wicked Acts, so they were living in perfection and still manged to commit a wicked act, so How can you say, they needed to fall first in order to do that?
Shem said It is also true that God gave the command so that when they did eat of the tree he would be justified in thrusting them from the garden. If they had not been commanded the opposition between the tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge would have still existed and they would have still eaten, but God would not have been able to thrust them out.
Thus we see there was an opposition in what tempted them, as well as an opposition in what they were supposed to do.
This simply is not found in Scripture. Rick b
Recent article Adam mentioned
Hi Rick. Cheers.
Adam and Eve were made good (Gen. 1: 31). In my PhD writing I reason they were morally perfect and did good but inexperienced in regard to evil, and pleased God. Future resurrected Christians and Old Testaments saints that are all regenerated/born again (John 3) trusting in the Biblical God, the only God, (Isaiah 43, 44, 45), the Alpha and Omega (Rev. 22: 13) will have experienced sin, death, the problem of evil, the atoning and resurrection work of Christ and will have spiritual/intellectual maturity that Adam and Eve did not, and will be guided by God through the Holy Spirit, in particular to not fall again.
God with pure motives willed the fall, he made Adam and Eve in a way that he knew within the circumstances they would fall, but he did not force or coerce it and therefore as they were significantly free, Adam and Eve were morally accountable for it. We are morally accountable for our sins, even as we come from a corrupted nature and can only be saved as we are predestined to be saved by the work of Christ (Eph. 1 and Rom. 8). Persons are saved by grace through faith in the gospel work (Eph. 2). This should lead to works but our salvation is not in any way caused by human works (Eph. 2, Rom. 4, Gal. 2). The corrupt nature of humanity (Rom. 1-3) demonstrates that God must determine who shall be saved, as persons cannot contribute to salvation through autonomous choice, will or any type of works.
I know you disagree with me. This is the reason I was hesitant to answer. All I can show is what I believe and why I believe it. I will say a few things really quick.
Concerning committing wickedness and righteousness, the very name of the tree would indicate they did not have an understanding of the concept, and therefore could not act in this manner. I know you disagree, but it is very logical. Also, when first created they were naked and were not ashamed, but after eating the fruit they were, a clear indication that their understanding has changed so they now know good from evil.
I have been through this idea with other people. I understand you do not believe it. But please try to see and understand that I do, and why I do.
As to other things that are mentioned: As I said, I do not give a full explanation as it would take several pages. Without this full explanation it is impossible to truly understand the doctrine. Because of this people will twist the doctrine to make it appear to mean what it does not. For this reason I will finish the list of ten, but I will make no other post, as fully explaining each is outside the power of any person while posting on any online threads.
Hello, Rick.
God is not omnipotent because he cannot ride a bicycle, or type a blog article?
Hey, Rick,
Just in general, you might be interested in some of the blog articles on this site:
Apologetics 315
Rick,
A man as intelligent as you should have noticed what the words "essencial doctrines of the gospel" mean.
Could you answer what is the "essencial doctrines of the gospel" according to God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost?
A correct understanding of the word "gospel" would help you see that Bruce's challenge is abundantly answered in books like 2ne2, 2ne9, mosiah3-5, mosiah 12-16, alma 5, alma 36-42, helaman 5, 3ne11-27...
Hope that sheds some light on you.
Milton, How about you answer this question I asked in the topic.
I would like to issue a Challenge to all my Latter-day saint friends to bring forth just 10 topics of your choice, compare them to the Bible and show me how they are a more accurate display of the Gospel.
The LDS gospel and the Gospel I believe in are worlds apart, they are two different gospels altogether. Rick b
Ok so first I'm going to say just because Bruce said anything does not make it doctrine or what the church believes. As to your 10 things no one can The Bible is the word of God it is the main testament of Jesus Christ
Any topic I could show you is backed up by the Bible things like Gods mercy see any of the miracles in the Bible Gods love for us His children. But I cannot give you 10 things that teach the gospel better then what is in the Bible. Also you are right most of those things are not taught in the BOM We believe they have been revealed through Joseph Smith and other prophets Also some of them are supported by the Bible I know that did not really answer your question sorry
John said Ok so first I'm going to say just because Bruce said anything does not make it doctrine or what the church believes.
No offense but Give me a break. First off, Bruce Quoted and used the former prophets like JS and BY to support what he believes and said. You mean your prophets were wrong? or cannot be trusted to be used as sources?
Also mormons from 25 plus years ago looked to Bruce as an authority, now Mormons dont since your doctrine changes so often it's impossible to keep up with.
John said
As to your 10 things no one can The Bible is the word of God it is the main testament of Jesus Christ
If this is true, why do LDS teach the Bible is missing things and you guys read, use and quote more often from the BoM than the Bible.
John said
But I cannot give you 10 things that teach the gospel better then what is in the Bible.
I'll give you credit for being honest, But I have had LDS claim they can, but then never did. Also According to Bruce He could, So do I trust Him or you? Again no offense but in the LDS church He had more authority than you and he wrote books, I'm guessing you did not. So here's a question, If you say it's not possible and Bruce said it is, then maybe you or him could be wrong on other things, ever think of that?
John said
Also you are right most of those things are not taught in the BOM We believe they have been revealed through Joseph Smith and other prophets Also some of them are supported by the Bible I know that did not really answer your question sorry
According to Bruce these things could be answered, so as I said, If your wrong and Bruce is right, maybe you dont know as much as you think, otherwise, if Bruce is wrong, but uses the Prophets like JS and BY but still is wrong, then maybe your church is wrong.
Hello Rick,
I hope you had a great year and that 2012 is treating you nicely.
I would like to point out the problem with semantics in your question. You must understand that ANY question (religious, political, or trivial) must be correctly understood in order to generate an accurate response. For you, "essential doctrines of the gospel" means the following quotes (taken from your post):
[[Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that Elohim (God the Father in Mormonism) was once a mortal man and that he was not always God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God has a body of flesh and bones?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that men can become Gods?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that temple participation is necessary to become exalted?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach the blood of Christ does not cleanse certain sins?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say there is more than one God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say males must hold either the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that there are "three degrees of glory"?]]
For Mormons, these (in their most part) refer to the "fringes of the gospel", or those doctrines which are "nice to know", but that may cause us to "look beyond the mark" and, having eyes, yet be blind to truth. The definition of "essential doctrines of the gospel" are the set of doctrines that teaches about the atonement and how to accept it into your life: faith, repentance, baptism, the gift of the holy ghost, and endure to the end (see 2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 18 to see why that is). These are the only doctrines required for salvation in the celestial kingdom (once again, notice the problem with semantics - your definition of salvation may be different than mine; always check what your understanding of a word is compared with others otherwise you will be seen as a heckler and 'anti' by others, which I'm sure you're not).
The Book of Mormon teaches the atonement and the gospel in ways that are much more deeper and personal than the New Testament does. Entire chapters (2 Nephi 2, 9, 31-33) deal with the doctrines related to the atonement and the gospel. Mosiah 12-16 explains beautifully the scripture "how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of them that publish peace" (Isaiah 52:7). Alma 40-42 deals with the doctrine of repentance. Helaman 5 shows the effect of the gospel in the lives of many individuals. 3 Nephi 11-27 teaches the essential doctrines once more, only this time through the words of the Savior. Surely for one who admits reading the entire Bible & Book of Mormon can appreciate the doctrinal sermons of the Book of Mormon, which enriches the already powerful teachings found in the Old and New Testaments. However, as pointed out earlier, the Book of Mormon teaches these doctrines more plainly, more directed towards us, so that we can avoid the confusion present in all churches nowadays (or do you truly think that Baptists, Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, Episcopalians, Non-denominational, etc. believe the Bible and its teachings in the same way)?
(continues in next comment)
... (continued from comment above)
But then, you did say that "[you] have read all 4 standard works. [You found] nothing at all in the Book of Mormon to prove it is inspired by God as LDS claim." All I can say is that you did not really read it. You may have skimmed over the surface, looked at the pages, read a few verses, but you did not study it. Try reading the Bible the same way you read the Book of Mormon and you will find that you will end up becoming an atheist by the end of Mark. I've studied the Bible and the Book of Mormon for over 20 years and am constantly amazed at how interwoven these books are. I cannot believe I was privileged to live in a time where I have these books to help me learn more about my Savior and all that he has done for me. I'm grateful for having so many accounts of the live of Jesus to read and study from.
To sum up, these are a few of the doctrines that, as Bruce R. McConkie said, are taught more plainly in the Book of Mormon than in the Bible:
- The Atonement of Jesus Christ
- The reason for his baptism
- The true nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as separate, distinct beings
- The necessity for the Church of Christ to be named in His name and to be founded upon his gospel
- The purpose of life (or what happens after death)
- The role of the Holy Ghost in the:
-- Purging of our sins
-- Converting one's heart to God
- The nature of God's covenant with Abraham and what it means to the world today
- The role of prophets in the history of mankind
I hope this sheds some light to McConkie's challenge. Like Calculus, one must comprehend the basic mathematical terms in order to comprehend single and multivariable integration. Things like "Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?" and other questions like so are 'nice to know' and do enrich our understanding of the gospel. We will learn these later on in life or after this life ends, but McConkie himself said that the purpose of the Book of Mormon is not to answer those questions, but it is to do numbers 1-3 in your post. The Book of Mormon does just that - and much more.
Your e-friend,
Milton Malardo.
Hello Milton,
I will try and reply to your posts soon. But for now if you have time I post on a fairly regular basis over at www.answeringlds.org
Click n the section that says, Want a voice on our blog.
Hello Milton,
Well you left a lot for me to reply to, so let me first start by saying this. I am posting n a regular basis on a blog called (Mormon Coffee) I am not a part of the staff or anything like that, I am simply a regular poster on the Blog, the address is, www.answeringlds.org.
I hope you check it out and post on the Blog. One thing I have noticed about the Mormon Coffee blog is, almost all mormon who have ever posted their find they cannot handle the truth and dont stay long. Many mormons that know as much as you do or more leave since they have no real answers and their are former mormons who have held high ranking positions in the LDS church, realize mormonism is a false gospel, come to the truth of who Jesus really is and now share on the Blog.
Now you quote from my topic and said
I would like to point out the problem with semantics in your question. You must understand that ANY question (religious, political, or trivial) must be correctly understood in order to generate an accurate response. For you, "essential doctrines of the gospel" means the following quotes (taken from your post):
[[Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that Elohim (God the Father in Mormonism) was once a mortal man and that he was not always God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God has a body of flesh and bones?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that men can become Gods?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that temple participation is necessary to become exalted?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach the blood of Christ does not cleanse certain sins?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say there is more than one God?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it say males must hold either the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood?
Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that there are "three degrees of glory"?
For Mormons, these (in their most part) refer to the "fringes of the gospel", or those doctrines which are "nice to know", but that may cause us to "look beyond the mark" and, having eyes, yet be blind to truth.
I know you really dont want to hear the truth, but the facts are this, These 10 things are not fringes of the gospel that would be nice to know. You act as if these 10 things I posted are nothing, but here is what you left out, Bruce said This Work on Mormon Doctrine Is unique--the first book of it's kind ever published.
It is the first major attempt to digest, explain, and analyze all of the important doctrines of the kingdom.
Bruce said, Not me, that these are important Doctrines of the kingdom, then you come along and blow them off as "Fringe" Teachings. Then Bruce goes onto say It is the first extensive compendium of the whole gospel-
He calls it the "whole gospel"
Bruce then goes onto say But never before has a comprehensive attempt been made to define and outline, in a brief manner, all of the basic principles of salvation--and to do it from the perspective of all revelation, both ancient and modern.
Wow Bruce says these are BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SALVATION, So do I believe you that they are "fringe" Teachings? Or do I believe Bruce?
I just asked you, Do I believe you or Bruce? Well Bruce goes onto say, This work on Mormon Doctrine is designed to help persons seeking salvation to gain that knowledge of God and his laws without which they cannot hope for an inheritance in the celestial city.
Wow, what if Bruce is correct and I ignore him and believe you? I could find myself with out salvation, But on the other hand if he is wrong and I believe you, then I could be putting myself under serious burden listing to him and living in fear.
JS Himself taught a man cannot be save din ignorance, Then Bruce went onto say, Since it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance of God and his laws and since a man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge of Jesus Christ and the plan of salvation, it follows that men are obligated at their peril to learn and apply the true doctrines of the gospel.
Wow Bruce believed your prophet and says that I am obligated at my own peril to know these things. I could go on but will stop quoting Bruce and add my own thoughts now.
The issue with, is God married or not is more important than you care to admit for the reason of, How could we have the "Pre-existence" if God was not married? According to the Pearl of Great Price and this is a "Standard" Doctrine used by LDS, the pre-existence is a major doctrine and talked about my Mormons all the time. If God did not have children we could not have a pre-existence. Then The Bible has Jesus telling the religious leaders that they do err in the issue of what they know about scripture. They were told by Jesus no one is married in Heaven, but they are like the angels. Why would God be married and have Kids, but tell us we cannot and will not be married?
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that men can become Gods?
This is a major doctrine that was taught by JS in the King follet discourse, You may say that LDS dont push this, and maybe they dont openly talk about it, but it is in their minds and they hope to attain a godlike state.
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that temple participation is necessary to become exalted?
Mormonism does teach that you do not stand any chance of entering the 3rd and highest heaven with out entering the temple.
You quoted me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
This is taught as doctrine and if I flat out ask Mormon Missionaries they admit to this teaching and dont hide it. But this goes against what the Bible says. The Bible teaches Jesus is eternal and is God, The Bible and the BoM both teach lucifer was created.
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach the blood of Christ does not cleanse certain sins?
This is not a fringe doctrine, Many people died at the hands of BY or others due to His teaching of Blood atonement. Then the Bible teaches we are saved by Grace and the shed blood of Jesus, yet mormonism teaches we are saved by grace PLUS WORKS. This works is of and from our hands, This means the Blood of Jesus is not enough and we need more.
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it say there is more than one God?
This is a major Doctrine for a few reasons? The Pearl of great price mentions God sitting in the counsel of the Gods. Mormonism teaches that God the father has a father who is a God. It denies the trinity and teaches God the Father, Jesus and the Holy sprit are 3 separate Gods. So this is important.
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it say males must hold either the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood?
Mormons make a big deal out of people holding the priesthood. This is a major doctrine and JS himself said, No man can see God and live with out the priesthood. So this poses a problem since JS did not hold the priesthood when he had these 9 different first vision accounts.
You quote me saying Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that there are "three degrees of glory"?
This is a major doctrine since it teaches which heaven we will finally end up in after death, and who goes their and why. Also it is important because Mormons spend very much time doing baptisms for the dead trying to get people out of the first heaven and into the second. I also have talked about this in person with Mormons.
Now I have shown I know a lot about Mormonism even if you choose to deny it. So to answer your question, Yes I have read the BoM from cover to cover, every page and have most of the Book highlighted, and even have a favorite BoM verse. So dont accuse me of not reading it or knowing it. More to come later.
Hello Milton, You said to me The definition of "essential doctrines of the gospel" are the set of doctrines that teaches about the atonement and how to accept it into your life: faith, repentance, baptism, the gift of the holy ghost, and endure to the end (see 2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 18 to see why that is).
Ok, Where in the Topic did I or Bruce say, Essential doctrines of the gospel? I re-read the topic I wrote to refresh my memory and that statement was never used. This is what was said This Work on Mormon Doctrine Is unique--the first book of it's kind ever published.
It is the first major attempt to digest, explain, and analyze all of the important doctrines of the kingdom.
Since Bruce said "Important doctrines of the kingdom" This means everything he wrote about in the book Mormon Doctrine is in his mind an important doctrine, and that means the ten things that you simply blew off as "Fringe teachings" Are to Bruce Important Doctrines.
Now you said
These are the only doctrines required for salvation in the celestial kingdom (once again, notice the problem with semantics - your definition of salvation may be different than mine; always check what your understanding of a word is compared with others otherwise you will be seen as a heckler and 'anti' by others, which I'm sure you're not).
You said these are the only doctrines required for salvation, yet Bruce said this But never before has a comprehensive attempt been made to define and outline, in a brief manner, all of the basic principles of salvation--and to do it from the perspective of all revelation, both ancient and modern.
Notice the part that says, "all of the basic principles of salvation" Bruce is implying all these things he wrote about are "basic principles of salvation"
Maybe you should check your understanding and compare it to what your teachers and leaders have said.
Milton said The Book of Mormon teaches the atonement and the gospel in ways that are much more deeper and personal than the New Testament does. Entire chapters (2 Nephi 2, 9, 31-33) deal with the doctrines related to the atonement and the gospel.
Lets start with the definition of Atonement. The Dictionary says a·tone·ment [uh-tohn-muhnt] Show IPA
noun
1.
satisfaction or reparation for a wrong or injury; amends.
2.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) Theology . the doctrine concerning the reconciliation of God and humankind, especially as accomplished through the life, suffering, and death of Christ.
3.
Christian Science . the experience of humankind's unity with God exemplified by Jesus Christ.
4.
Archaic . reconciliation; agreement.
Do you really believe That God the father who not give us humans enough information telling us how to be saved? You mean after Jesus and the apostles died and Jesus rose from the dead and moved on to heaven that he would really allow his word to fall into corruption and that we would need "another Gospel" Such as the BoM? If you say yes as I'm sure you will, then can you please explain to me or at least try and tell me why God would wait almost two thousand years and allow people to live not knowing and why not bring someone like JS forth sooner than 2000 years? Or explain why after JS found the golden plates he was not allowed to translate them right then and there? He had to wait some more years, Then explain why he had 9 count them 9 first vision accounts. Why not just one? Why 9 that spanned years? I mean thats not enough for you to say maybe JS is a fraud?
Then if you still think all this is cool and nothing wrong, then explain why JS translated the BoM by sticking his face in a hate, and according to the way the BoM was translated there should be zero errors, yet we have over 4,000 changes to the BoM and some are doctrinal changes. And with all this JS is still not a fraud? Really? Why and how is that possible?
Now onto the issue of Second Nephi 2. I re-read the entire chapter two, I have not read anything that "Adds" to the Bible, All I read was things I already knew from the Bible and the only thing that was in Nephi that is not taught in the Bible is Adam and Eve were meant to fall, since according to Nephi if they did not fall then that means they could not have children or "progress" But this logic poses many serious problems, it does not answer them. God never said in the Bible you cannot have Kids if you dont eat from this tree. Nephi teaches that Lucifer betrayed Adam and Eve by telling them to eat from the tree, And in the Bible God punishes Adam and Eve and Lucifer for eating from the tree or causing them to eat.
Now why would God tell them not to eat from the tree lest they die, And then punish lucifer for talking them into eating? Thats not a loving God I would want to follow. So this does not show a more accurate in-depth view, this show a lying evil God would would say you cannot have Kids or Joy if you dont fall, but then trick them by saying dont eat from the tree and then after they do punish them for something you really wanted them to do all along. Really? Your not bothered by this and really believe this is a more accurate way of God?
I find it rather interesting that in Nephi 9 It says Eternal God, Well how can he be eternal if he is just a God in the endless line of Gods? His father is a God and so on. Then it says the Devil Beguiled Adam and Eve, Again God says Dont eat from this tree, but then sets it up to have Lucifer Beguile Adam and Eve into doing what God said dont do, but all along this was Gods plan? Then punish then all, Thats not loving. The according to Mormonism Lucifer is a son to God the father. So why would God the father set His son up for a fall like that and punish him?
I find it funny that all LDS I have ever spoken with Deny eternal Hell fire and damnation, yet 2 Nephi 9:16 mentions the eternal lake of fire prepared for the Devil and His angels. The Bible mentions this also, so this is not adding more info that I was not aware of, But also this shows God the father Setting his son lucifer up to be eternally punished. How is that loving?
(Still more to come as I get time)
Milton,
From what I can tell and have learned from speaking with Mormons over the past 15 years, LDS dont read the Bible, They dont trust it and rarely use it. You mentioned 2 Nephi 2,9 and 31-33.
I re-read them and really dont see anything that add more to the Bible. So instead of me breaking it all down and feeling like I am wasting my time, since I am assuming you wont reply to any of this any way, I think you should tell me in your own words, What is the Bible missing that Nephi adds to it to make it further in knowledge.
I really did not see anything in their, so why dont you tell me?
Milton goes onto say Helaman 5 shows the effect of the gospel in the lives of many individuals.
First off, how does this really help me? Or answer the question in the challenge I posed? People that have known me all my life like my Brother, parents and some friends can tell you about the change in my life over the years from knowing Jesus.
People who I go to church with can tell you about the change they noticed over the past 12 years I have been at this church and the same goes for me, towards them. Change means what?
Milton said the Book of Mormon teaches these doctrines more plainly, more directed towards us, so that we can avoid the confusion present in all churches nowadays (or do you truly think that Baptists, Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, Episcopalians, Non-denominational, etc. believe the Bible and its teachings in the same way)?
If you really believe this, then please explain how come you have many "denominations" that cannot agree with in Mormonism? Lets see, you have the FLDS, and RLDS that believe JS is the founder and they believe in the BoM, yet they dont agree with the LDS on many issues.
So you can sit here and say, see Christianity is wrong because there are things they dont agree on, yet you ignore this fact about the LDS. why is that? O-yea I know, It's called Hypocrisy, and it's easier to throw stones at us than deal with or admit you have the same issues.
Milton says But then, you did say that "[you] have read all 4 standard works. [You found] nothing at all in the Book of Mormon to prove it is inspired by God as LDS claim." All I can say is that you did not really read it. You may have skimmed over the surface, looked at the pages, read a few verses, but you did not study it.
I think I have more than proved I have read the BoM and know more than you are willing to admit. But I guess if you cannot answer my response, it tells me you are the one that does not know what you believe and cannot defend it.
Cont Later.
Milton said Try reading the Bible the same way you read the Book of Mormon and you will find that you will end up becoming an atheist by the end of Mark.
If what you say is true, then how come your not an atheist? This tells me you dont read the Bible very much and by your lack of reply to me and the fact that their is much you dont know about Mormonism it tells me you really dont know what you believe.
Milton said
I've studied the Bible and the Book of Mormon for over 20 years and am constantly amazed at how interwoven these books are. I cannot believe I was privileged to live in a time where I have these books to help me learn more about my Savior and all that he has done for me. I'm grateful for having so many accounts of the live of Jesus to read and study from.
From what I have read by you, you dont study the Bible, just the BoM. And if you removed all the parts of the BoM that are word for word copied from the Bible, you would have so little left that the BoM would just be the ramblings of a lunatic.
Milton said To sum up, these are a few of the doctrines that, as Bruce R. McConkie said, are taught more plainly in the Book of Mormon than in the Bible:
- The Atonement of Jesus Christ
- The reason for his baptism
- The true nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as separate, distinct beings
- The necessity for the Church of Christ to be named in His name and to be founded upon his gospel
- The purpose of life (or what happens after death)
- The role of the Holy Ghost in the:
-- Purging of our sins
-- Converting one's heart to God
- The nature of God's covenant with Abraham and what it means to the world today
- The role of prophets in the history of mankind
I already showed this is not true, and it is upon you to explain from the BoM how it really does add to the Bible, but since you dont read your Bible, you cannot do that. (Cont)
Milton said I hope this sheds some light to McConkie's challenge. Like Calculus, one must comprehend the basic mathematical terms in order to comprehend single and multivariable integration. Things like "Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?" and other questions like so are 'nice to know' and do enrich our understanding of the gospel. We will learn these later on in life or after this life ends, but McConkie himself said that the purpose of the Book of Mormon is not to answer those questions, but it is to do numbers 1-3 in your post. The Book of Mormon does just that - and much more.
This has been covered already, so now it is up to you to either answer me or ignore me and show that you really dont understand.
Your e-friend Rick
Hey Rick, still at this I see, at least 6 months ago you were. I am even more Mormon now than I was in 08. Very few Mormon-Haters let me post.
Weston,
So your proud of the fact that your running head long into hell, well hope you enjoy the trip, good luck with that.
I cannot speak for as to why people wont let you post, as I dont know everyone or every place you have tried, but IMO, They wont let you post because, you call names, degrade people and have nothing to offer to the topic.
I seem to recall you saying some pretty nasty things about me.
Post a Comment