Why Dont Christians Accept the Book of Mormon as Valid?

[Katzpur]

I would have to agree to that for now.However, there is a lot of LDS here on our country and they're saying that the book of Mormons saves many souls more than the Bible did. Isn't that a contradiction of the BIble? Also,I humbly ask, what is the LDS' teaching about Christ's divinity?

I hadn't noticed that you're from the Phillipines! Cool! I wish I were there right now and away from this snow!

In response to your comment about the Book of Mormon: No book ever saved anyone. The Book of Mormon can't save you, nor can the Bible. Jesus Christ is the only means by which we can be saved. Both books testify of that.

In response to your question about Christ's divinity: We believe that He is the Only Begotten Son of God. He is therefore divine. He shares all of His Father's divine attributes, i.e. His knowledge, power, and unconditional love.

 

[Katzpur]

Books don't save, indeed. But the Word does. How do you use the word "save" then?

I'd say that "salvation" can have different meanings depending upon the context. I can think of three different meanings offhand.

1. Salvation from the permanance of death. If Christ had not risen from the dead, death would be the end for each and every one of us. He was resurrected and promised that each and every person who has ever lived will also be resurrected.

2. Salvation from eternal punishment. As we reach the age at which we are able to distinguish right from wrong, we all chose, at some point, to willfully disregard God's commandments, thus estranging ourselves from Him. It is through Jesus Christ and Him alone that we may be reconciled to God. We believe that even those who do not accept His sacrifice on their behalf will ultimately be saved. They will have to pay the price for their own sins, but this punishment will not be eternal.

3. Exaltation, or Life Eternal in the Presence of God. We believe that Christ will "reward every man according to his works. Where there is greater obedience and faithfulness, there will be a greater reward. The greatest reward that a person can have in Heaven is to become, as Christ commanded us to be -- "perfect... as [our] Father which is in Heaven is perfect." This is the "fulness of salvation. It means being able to progress eternally.

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

He shares all of His Father's divine attributes, i.e. His knowledge, power, and unconditional love.

According to LDS doctrine, would we not have to remove eternal/ without beginning/ uncreated from the divine attributes for the Son?

Were the Son created and not existent from eternity, it is impossible to say that they are equal in divinity.

 

[Katzpur]

According to LDS doctrine, would we not have to remove eternal/ without beginning/ uncreated from the divine attributes for the Son?

Were the Son created and not existent from eternity, it is impossible to say that they are equal in divinity.

I wish I had time to address this tonight, but unfortunately I have to sign off for the night. I'll get back to you tomorrow, though. Meanwhile, some other LDS poster might have some input on this for you.

 

[Renji]

I hadn't noticed that you're from the Phillipines! Cool! I wish I were there right now and away from this snow!

In response to your comment about the Book of Mormon: No book ever saved anyone. The Book of Mormon can't save you, nor can the Bible. Jesus Christ is the only means by which we can be saved. Both books testify of that.

In response to your question about Christ's divinity: We believe that He is the Only Begotten Son of God. He is therefore divine. He shares all of His Father's divine attributes, i.e. His knowledge, power, and unconditional love.

Yes, nice to know that someone here knows about Philippines.The books don't, but the Word does , and the source of that Word, Jesus Christ I see that the word save or salvation in LDS is like a continuing process. Tell me, what does your doctrine/s say about it? To be exact, how can a person achieve salvation. Secondly, what do the LDS preach about hell?

 

[Godslove]

Why don't Christians accept the Book of Mormon to be true? It testifys of Christ our Savior, as the Messiah, the Great Mediator. And it's a solid Book, it has substance.

You don't believe there is any way that Christ would have appeared to his "Sheep of another fold" (mentioned in the bible) in the americas after his ressurection. Or that Both God and Christ would appear to a modern day prophet.

Yet, they believe that God, or even the "Mother Mary" would speak to 6 old women in Bosnia?

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on why you think the way you do.

There are many people that judge a book by it’s cover , they take no thought to see for them selves what other’s have fond out for them selves. It is for each individual to seek for the truth for them selves .for we must all seek out our own salvation .those that seek for the truth find the truth.. Remember it is for your self to find the truth and when you do, do not take it to another until you have become strong in what you have found. for it is easy to be mocked by others that do not understand the truth. there are many that find the truth but because of others with there displeasure of mocking them, they have fallen away.

 

[roli]

Why don't Christians accept the Book of Mormon to be true? It testifys of Christ our Savior, as the Messiah, the Great Mediator. And it's a solid Book, it has substance.

You don't believe there is any way that Christ would have appeared to his "Sheep of another fold" (mentioned in the bible) in the americas after his ressurection. Or that Both God and Christ would appear to a modern day prophet.

Yet, they believe that God, or even the "Mother Mary" would speak to 6 old women in Bosnia?

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on why you think the way you do.

Not only are there no geographical,historical,archaelogical evidence to support the book or or oringinal manuscripts found.
It seems to me that many of the passages,principals,statements, teachings found in the "Book of Mormon " are very similar to that of the bible.
....and that concerns me, because it is the little leaven that leavens the whole loaf.

As a matter of fact, many principals and teachings of the bible have found there way into other religious books.
One just has to look at the uncomparable records the bible has made over any other book in history, from most printed book in the world to the most translated and circulated book ever to compass the globe, not to mention the countless lives and the history of the entire world has been changed by the word of God to man

 

[silvermoon383]

Not only are there no geographical,historical,archaelogical evidence to support the book or or oringinal manuscripts found.

You know, I'd really wish people would check their facts before making statements such as this.

Here's some reading you can do: Book of Mormon historicity - FAIRMormon

 

[Katzpur]

Not only are there no geographical,historical,archaelogical evidence to support the book or or oringinal manuscripts found.

You seem to know everything there is to know about everything you already know. Congratulations.

 

[roli]

You know, I'd really wish people would check their facts before making statements such as this.

Here's some reading you can do: Book of Mormon historicity - FAIRMormon

Maybe researching outside the LDS leaders, teachers and so called scholars and prophets may help you to gain some perspective
There are just as many, if not more references that oppose the Book of Mormon as being of historical accuracy.
Reading for yourself, just don't criticize the source ,but examine and investigate the facts , for I have seen these facts and more elsewere
Historical inaccuracy of the Book of Mormon

...so where do we go from here

 

[roli]

You seem to know everything there is to know about everything you already know. Congratulations.

I understand how vehement you are in regards to the study and defence of the Book Of Mormon, but be prepared to face opposition without taking offence.

It's your doctrinal teaching that is under scrutiny, not your person.

,,so lighten up it's:yes: Christmas

 

[roli]

I'd say that "salvation" can have different meanings depending upon the context. I can think of three different meanings offhand.

1. Salvation from the permanance of death. If Christ had not risen from the dead, death would be the end for each and every one of us. He was resurrected and promised that each and every person who has ever lived will also be resurrected.

2. Salvation from eternal punishment. As we reach the age at which we are able to distinguish right from wrong, we all chose, at some point, to willfully disregard God's commandments, thus estranging ourselves from Him. It is through Jesus Christ and Him alone that we may be reconciled to God. We believe that even those who do not accept His sacrifice on their behalf will ultimately be saved. They will have to pay the price for their own sins, but this punishment will not be eternal.

3. Exaltation, or Life Eternal in the Presence of God. We believe that Christ will "reward every man according to his works. Where there is greater obedience and faithfulness, there will be a greater reward. The greatest reward that a person can have in Heaven is to become, as Christ commanded us to be -- "perfect... as [our] Father which is in Heaven is perfect." This is the "fulness of salvation. It means being able to progress eternally.

I appreciate your personal perspective on salvation ,but have you even considered what Jesus actually said about salvation and what requirements were required.

 

[Katzpur]

I understand how vehement you are in regards to the study and defence of the Book Of Mormon, but be prepared to face opposition without taking offence.

Excuse me? I've taken no offense.

It's your doctrinal teaching that is under scrutiny, not your person.

And I'm willing to defend those teachings. All I'm saying is that if you are going to make an accusation, you need to be willing to provide evidence to support is. So far, you haven't done that.

so lighten up it's:yes: Christmas

So it is. :yes:

 

[Katzpur]

Maybe researching outside the LDS leaders, teachers and so called scholars and prophets may help you to gain some perspective

You know, as soon as I hear someone use the term "so-called" to describe some of the individuals you are obviously referring to, I know right away that further conversation is fruitless.

...so where do we go from here

Around in circles, just like we've been doing.

 

[Katzpur]

I appreciate your personal perspective on salvation ,but have you even considered what Jesus actually said about salvation and what requirements were required.

Of course I have. Which of my three statements would you like to examine further? Which ones do you take issue with?

 

[roli]

Excuse me? I've taken no offense.

And I'm willing to defend those teachings. All I'm saying is that if you are going to make an accusation, you need to be willing to provide evidence to support is. So far, you haven't done that.

So it is. :yes:

I'm sorry if you felt backed into a corner on the other thread, this was not my intention.
I was just trying to understand all the differing viewpoints expressed within the articles of LDS teaching regarding doctrines of Christianity.
I appreciate listening and learning what and why one believes what they do under the light of scripture,so if you care to discuss some of the key doctrinal conflictions that LDS has with scirpture, I would be happy to go further with it.

..some of these articles mentioned above that express certain beliefs within LDS include "Aricles of Faith, Doctrines and Covenants, Gospel Through The Ages, Mormon Doctrine,Journal of Discourse, Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon,Pearl of Great Price
...let's compare it in light of scripture as christians are suppose to do

 

[Katzpur]

I'm sorry if you felt backed into a corner on the other thread, this was not my intention.

Of course it was, roli. Every time any of us has a discussion with you, it ends up with you telling us our beliefs aren't Christian. You're more subtle than you used to be, but you never miss an opportunity to try to tell people what Mormons believe and what the LDS Church teaches. You seldom get it right, and when we correct you, you simply ignore us.

I was just trying to understand all the differing viewpoints expressed within the articles of LDS teaching regarding doctrines of Christianity.
I appreciate listening and learning what and why one believes what they do under the light of scripture,so if you care to discuss some of the key doctrinal conflictions that LDS has with scirpture, I would be happy to go further with it.

LDS doctrine doesn't contradict scripture at all. It's based on scripture. If you would care to pick one point of doctrine and examine it further, I'm sure you find a lot of Latter-day Saints who are more than happy to talk to you about it. This particular thread, however, is on the Book of Mormon in particular. If you want to talk about why you don't accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, this would be the place to do so. Otherwise, I suggest you start a new thread on a single topic, rather than just making this one a catch-all for all your gripes about my religion.

..some of these articles mentioned above that express certain beliefs within LDS include "Aricles of Faith, Doctrines and Covenants, Gospel Through The Ages, Mormon Doctrine,Journal of Discourse, Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon,Pearl of Great Price
...let's compare it in light of scripture as christians are suppose to do

When you start your new thread, you might we well begin by sticking to the writings that comprise the LDS canon of scripture. These are:

1. The Holy Bible
2. The Book of Mormon
3. The Doctrine and Covenants
4. The Pearl of Great Price.

You might as well not even mention these:

1. The Articles of Faith
2. The Gospel Through the Ages
3. Mormon Doctrine
4. The Journal of Discourses
5. The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith

I'm not saying that what is taught in these last five books is not true. I'm just saying that none of these sources contain official doctrine. They contain the opinions and interpretations of some of the past LDS leadership, but they are not doctrinally binding. If you really want to understand our beliefs, you'll accept this explanation.

 

[mohe3439]

Why don't Christians accept the Book of Mormon to be true?

Well it depends in what context you mean true. I'm sure that some Christians believe that its message is and set of values are true, but rather it's the way in which it is delivered. Put yourself in the position of a Christian. There is this group of people who say that after Jesus died he went to the Americas and converted some Native Americans to Christianity and he wrote it down on some gold tablets which 1500 years or so later were uncovered by some man who hasn't done anything important in his life before hand. Not only that but from what I know no one else saw them so the only witness to them would be the person who would have a church founded in his name, not only that but the tribe in Native Americans Jesus supposedly converted there is no proof what so ever of them ever existing so really the only proof of ANY of this happening is from he word of a very normal man.

That would be like some construction worker who has a vision and goes digging around in an abandoned lot for some gold tablets that say the same thing as the Mormon ones do. And because he doesn't show them to anyone everyone will think he was an attention hog and leave him alone. The only reason that it worked back than was that everyone was so very naive that they just went with what ever they were told.

 

[Katzpur]

Well it depends in what context you mean true. I'm sure that some Christians believe that its message is and set of values are true, but rather it's the way in which it is delivered. Put yourself in the position of a Christian.

That's not going to be hard. I am one.

There is this group of people who say that after Jesus died he went to the Americas and converted some Native Americans to Christianity and he wrote it down on some gold tablets which 1500 years or so later were uncovered by some man who hasn't done anything important in his life before hand.

LOL. Well that's an interesting twist to the story. Jesus wrote down the story on gold tablets? :biglaugh:That's one I've never heard before! You get an "A" for creativity.

Not only that but from what I know no one else saw them so the only witness to them would be the person who would have a church founded in his name, not only that but the tribe in Native Americans Jesus supposedly converted there is no proof what so ever of them ever existing so really the only proof of ANY of this happening is from he word of a very normal man.

Actually, eleven other individuals saw the plates, but you're absolutely right: There is no proof. There is only faith. And that's the case with every religion on earth.

That would be like some construction worker who has a vision and goes digging around in an abandoned lot for some gold tablets that say the same thing as the Mormon ones do. And because he doesn't show them to anyone everyone will think he was an attention hog and leave him alone. The only reason that it worked back than was that everyone was so very naive that they just went with what ever they were told.

And why does it work now? Are people less naive now than they were 180 years ago? Why are two thirds of the 13 million members of the Church today first-generation converts? What is it that makes 900 people worldwide convert to Mormonism every day? According to the statistics, people are apparently a whole lot more gullible today than they were in Joseph Smith's day.

And if everybody just believed what they were told, why didn't everybody convert to Mormonism? Instead of converting, the overwhelming majority of the people Joseph told his story to persecuted him relentlessly. They tarred and feathered him, and eventually killed him in cold blood. Thousands of his followers were subsequently forced to leave their homes in the dead of winter and start what would end up to be a death march for many of them across the Great Plains of the United States. Women were raped. Men were tortured. Children had their brains blown out. Yup, everybody just believed what they were told.

Seriously, if you're going to continue along this line of thought, you really need to stop and think before you say much more. Your "facts" are not accurate, your analogies aren't the slightest bit logical and your conclusions don't follow your premise.

 

[roli]

Of course it was, roli. Every time any of us has a discussion with you, it ends up with you telling us our beliefs aren't Christian. You're more subtle than you used to be, but you never miss an opportunity to try to tell people what Mormons believe and what the LDS Church teaches. You seldom get it right, and when we correct you, you simply ignore us.

I'm sorry ,but there are so many views and altered views within all the teachings and writings of LDS, even as far back as the founder, what do you expect for onlookers.
Are you really pointing me out alone as the only one who questions the theology of LDS . I mean it's not me that presents differing viewpoints only one who questions them in light of scripture.

LDS doctrine doesn't contradict scripture at all. It's based on scripture.

Yes ,only if it agree's with Joseph Smith, at least according to this article:
The Church News, a Mormon newspaper, carried this statement concerning the Bible: "It is the Word of God. It is not perfect. The prophet Joseph made many corrections in it."March 6, 1983, editorial page).
According to this scripture,It's based on scripture but it certainly remains conditional upon Joseph

If you would care to pick one point of doctrine and examine it further, I'm sure you find a lot of Latter-day Saints who are more than happy to talk to you about it. This particular thread, however, is on the Book of Mormon in particular. If you want to talk about why you don't accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, this would be the place to do so.

The Book of Mormon echoes this idea in First Nephi 13:26: "... a great and abominable church which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the lamb many parts which are plain and most precious..."
Who is this referring to ?
Maybe you don't accept this Orson fellow, but is this not what he said:
The apostle Orson Pratt, in his book The Seer says this about the Christian community: "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness


Shortly after the religious awakening in upstate New York, Joseph Smith had a vision. In the vision he asked God which Christian church he should join. Joseph Smith writes in The Pearl of Great Price: "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight."I believe that one could safely say that Joseph Smith considered the Christian church to be a false church. Because of this basic premise, the logical conclusion would be, if the church is false, then the source of its doctrine--the Bible--must be false as well. Therefore, one can better understand the motivation behind the eighth article of faith of the Mormon church: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly."
Do you agree with this profession of Joseph Smith


1. The Holy Bible
2. The Book of Mormon
3. The Doctrine and Covenants
4. The Pearl of Great Price.

You might as well not even mention these:

1. The Articles of Faith
2. The Gospel Through the Ages
3. Mormon Doctrine
4. The Journal of Discourses
5. The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith

I'm not saying that what is taught in these last five books is not true. I'm just saying that none of these sources contain official doctrine.

So they could be true ,but not counted as official doctrine ?
So they are all just opinions than?

They contain the opinions and interpretations of some of the past LDS leadership, but they are not doctrinally binding. If you really want to understand our beliefs, you'll accept this explanation

Are you saying that some of the father's of the faith of the LDS are in question.
I mean I have read the history and the doctrinal alterations of some of your orgainisations leaders.
Understanding,i think requires more than just accepting your personal viewpoint, it takes some order of consistency and logic in the facts of your teachings and writings