Thursday, March 05, 2009

Bruce R. McConkie's "Challenge

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"?

8 comments:

thekingpin68 said...

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

thekingpin68 said...

Hi Rick B,

You now have competition with my new blog link...Rick T.

I hope you are well/better.

Russ;)

Rick T

shematwater said...

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.

rick b said...

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

thekingpin68 said...

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.

shematwater said...

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.

thekingpin68 said...

Hello, Rick.

God is not omnipotent because he cannot ride a bicycle, or type a blog article?

Jeff said...

Hey, Rick,

Just in general, you might be interested in some of the blog articles on this site:
Apologetics 315