How Can We Know When We Hear

[Paul Ray]

When a thread is being added to for the sole purpose of reaching a desired post count, I suggest it is time for that thread to be closed, and it would tickle me pink if it were closed before reaching 600. Mods?

Did you think it was okay to only complain about the number of posts in this thread?

Your post was pretty much nothing but a complaint.

What did you do to add anything on this topic?

And btw, or more to the point, I know Jesus is the Christ because God has told me.

[TrashcanMan79]

Did you think it was okay to only complain about the number of posts in this thread?

Yes.

Your post was pretty much nothing but a complaint.

Correct.

What did you do to add anything on this topic?

I added my complaint, which, as I answered in your first question to me, I think is okay.

And btw, or more to the point, I know Jesus is the Christ because God has told me.

I can't argue with someone who has it from God.

[Paul Ray]

I can't argue with someone who has it from God.

I think you could have, but I appreciate the fact that you didn't.

[TrashcanMan79]

I think you could have, but I appreciate the fact that you didn't.

I figure Freedom in Truth gives you a difficult enough time about it, so I can let you slide!

[Calm]

And we have 600...do I hear 700? 700? how about 650? 650 anyone?

.....600 going, going...?

[Freedom in Truth]

In response to TCMâ??s link, Post #482 -

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/far...ill/unique.html

I looked up the authorâ??s bio - http://theskepticalreview.com/AuthorFarrel...ml#rationalizer

Interestingly enough, it reminds me of Ehrmanâ??s bio. I agree, believing in Biblical inerrancy (no errors of any kind in the Bible) would cause me to run, too. However, are the two choices that the Bible has no inconsistencies of any kind or that the Bible should be tossed? That, to me, is not good thinking.

The bio also gives reasons why the authorâ??s present mission is to rid society of the Bible. Again, I see a very black and white approach which I feel is simplistic. Exactly how many children have died because their parents prayed and refused medical help? Is this the fault of the Biblical text or a misinterpretation of the Biblical text? Child-beating and abuse - can someone who knows Godâ??s heart believe this is Godâ??s will? Perhaps the problem is lack of Biblical understanding and lack of knowing God and His heart - and not the Bible itself. Evil was not introduced into the world by a woman - his reference verse does not say this. He also shows no understanding of the word â??headâ? as far as a man being â??headâ? of a woman. I could go on, but I will skip to his last point - was Stalin a â??religious fanaticâ?? If you want to look at â??godlessâ? societies please look at France after the 1789 revolution, or the USSR, or communist China. Nice examples of superior societies because they threw out religion.

It would be impossible in this format to point out all the flaws in Tillâ??s article so I will just touch on a few. The chapter on the uniqueness of the Bible was not meant to prove that it is Godâ??s Word, but that the book is unique and one should seriously consider it - that is all.

The Bible: Unique in Its Continuity - McDowell states â??In spite of its diversity, the Bible presents a single unfolding story: Godâ??s redemption of human beings.â? And, â??Finally, and most important, among all the people described in the Bible, the leading character throughout is the one, true, living God made known through Jesus Christ.â? (p. 6) These are McDowellâ??s conclusions. Till says there is no unified theme, then presents not a â??themeâ? but evidence that prophets disagreed with each other. How is this part of â??Godâ??s redemption of human beingsâ??

McDowell never claims the Bible to be â??inerrantâ? by Tillâ??s definition, yet Till seems to put this on McDowell anyway. Till misses what McDowell is saying because he insists in seeing only two possible approaches to the Bible - his definition of inerrancy, or a dangerous, ridiculous book. He does not seem to consider any other way to view the Bible.

As far as prophets disagreeing with each other - several times in the Bible the prophet in the minority has his writings included, yet the prophets in the majority do not. Why would that be? How did the one lone prophet win over the 400 or so other prophets who have the kingâ??s favor?

The Bible - Unique in Its Circulation, Translation and Survival - zealous commitment does not prove something is Truth, but it might be good to look at why people are willing to risk their lives and die for it. Would Till die for his conviction that the Bible is a book no one should follow?

I find it presumptuous of Till to speak for McDowell on Judaism, but again it goes with his assumption that all Christians think like he did as a Christian. God doesnâ??t have a â??religionâ?. Jesus was a Jew - His first followers were Jews. Jesus did not come to do away with â??Judaismâ? and to establish â??Christianityâ?. Gentiles were grafted into a properly-interpreted â??Judaismâ?. For information on recent Christian persecution you can check such organizations as The Voice of the Martyrs. As to his statement that the Bible survived because of favorable political and social conditions, etc. - Christians were persecuted until Constantine made Christianity legal - 313 A.D. But interestingly enough we have 5,366 copies of the NT (fragments to complete copies) from the years 114-325 A.D. For Pliny Secundusâ?? Natural History (written in 61-113 A.D.) we have 7 copies with the earliest copies from 850 A.D. And for Tacitusâ?? Annals (written in 100 A.D.) we have 20 copies with the earliest copies from 1100 A.D. (p. 38) The NT, though possibly life-threatening to have, was a popular manuscript . . . why?

Till seems to forget that Christians (the Catholic or Anglican Church) persecuted Christians and burned Bibles. I believe it was Wycliffe who was burned at the stake and his Bibles were used for the fire.

The Bible: Unique in Its Teachings - could it be that the first 11 chapters of Genesis and Babylonian myths are from the same Source? Till lists several â??teachingsâ?, but these are not what McDowell lists. McDowell lists 3 categories - Prophecy, History, and Character. Earlier McDowell stated that the Bible was the story of Godâ??s redemption of human beings - is that an idea in another early religion of the area? How about the idea that God loves us (which is why He redeems us)? And again, I see no evidence that Till is approaching the Bible as Jewish literature.

Till skips over the section on Character, which includes the following - â??â??The Bible is not such a book a man would write if he could . . .â?? The Bible deals very frankly with the sins of its characters, even when those sins reflect badly on Godâ??s chosen people, leaders, and the biblical writers themselves. For example, the sins of the patriarchs are mentioned, the sins of the people are denounced, King Davidâ??s adultery with Bathsheba and his subsequent attempted cover-up is revealed, the Gospel evangelists paint their own faults and those of the apostles, and the disorder within the church is exposed.â? (p. 13)

The Bible: Unique in Its Influence (on literature and civilization) - Till thinks the Quâ??ran could be reproduced from quotes in other books but he does not check out if this is true. Why not? Then he goes on to discuss the negative influences of the Bible on society. I have already discussed this, but I would say various interpretations and not the Bible itself have had some negative influences. Of course, there have positive influences as well, but Till does not give a balanced picture. Neither does he discuss the Muslim treatment of women or the terrorist activities of some Muslims. He accuses McDowell of a smorgasbord approach, yet he seems to use the same. I would be interested in Till discussing the Armenian Holocaust, for example.

It is too bad that Till and others can only think of two ways to view the Bible. It is also unfortunate that scholars like Till never seem to consider viewing the Bible as Jewish literature. I am sorry the doctrine of inerrancy he was taught disappointed him, but his lack of scholarly insight on a Hebraic book disappoints me.

[Freedom in Truth]

You are assuming that all occult practices are of the devil.

Yes I am. But I am going to refrain from responding any more to your post because it is a tangent and TCM has started another thread!

[Tsuzuki]

Yes I am. But I am going to refrain from responding any more to your post because it is a tangent and TCM has started another thread!

Actually, I think it's central to the discussion, because if you are making faulty assumptions, then your arguments and conclusions are likewise going to be messed up. I think it might be a good idea to reevaluate some of your foundational claims, if only so that your arguments can be more palatable to a rational mind. Perhaps you could spend some time in the other thread in hopes of gaining more understanding on the matter. Maybe voice some of your own concerns there, as well.

[Selah]

YEEEAAAHHHH!!!!! Thanks everybody!!!!

[Neighbor]

No, this is about how to gain wisdom, when any of us lack wisdom, by asking God for wisdom. And when we ask for wisdom we should not waver when we ask God for it.

That may be what you think. I do not think that, but let's suppose that I did for a minute. I believe I am already in Christ Jesus, so when I ask God to give me wisdom, I should avoid wavering when I ask God.

Yes, he did, didn't he. I think we should be wise enough to avoid believing a lie.

There you go. I'm glad to see you agree with me now.

I agree with this point too.

And it is at those times that I ask God for wisdom, and I testify God has given some to me.

Uh huh. I believe anyone can ask God for wisdom.

It might help to start another thread on this issue, but basically, we (LDS) believe God must authorize our actions before God will authorize our actions. And God often works through representatives instead of doing everything by Himself.

I agree that it should be another topic of discussion, but my other answers are yes, and yes, I believe.

I ask God to guide me, personally, and when God does, God gives me some more of God's wisdom.

One thing I've come to realize more and more is that it is God who draws us to Jesus Christ, and as such I really believe that is true.

Per the Sacrament prayer, the call to keep the commandments of Jesus Christ, have the LDS a list of them?

[Neil]

That's right. And the devils in Hell also know the truth of "Mormonism." Well, at least according to Brigham:

BTW, another fantastic quote from the same sermon:

More from Pres. Young (from a different sermon):

And even more from Brother Brigham (yet another sermon):

Edit:

Forgot to include references. The first two are from JoD Vol 9 "ETERNAL PUNISHMENT-"MORMONISM," &c." given on January 12, 1862

The third is from JoD Vol 13 "TRUTH AND ERROR" given on APRIL 24, 1870

Last from JoD Vol 11 "HOLY GHOST REQUISITE TO TEACH THE TRUTH" given April 29, 1866

Demons are scarry and I don't like to be scared, so I'm glad neither LDS nor most other denominations try to identify demonic ideas in recent years. Generally modern man just separates good ideas from bad. Clearly demons still attempt to deceive, but mostly we deny the existance of demons, by not giving a demon credit for a bad idea. In my opinion this reduces the probability of demon possesion.

I reilize that this does not fit well with most of what Doctor Steuss typed, so please forgive me if I seem to be changing the subject of this thread. Neil

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

But, is every interpretation valid?

Paul - Obviously not. Is this one of those questions where you just like to hear yourself think?

No. It was a serious question. I thought TCM might consider all the interpretation styles valid. And you seem to think that all interpretations are from God - itâ??s just that God tells some people more than others or whatever. I wouldnâ??t think God gives someone an invalid interpretation, would you?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Would it be important to study how Jesus and the apostles looked at the OT?

Paul - Important to who? And why? And what sources of information would you use for that?

If you were to hear from a Pharisee, who was alive in that day, what do you think they would tell you?

That cult is following Jesus. We need to teach them the truth.

What would someone else say if they believed their story?

Everyone has their own opinion about something... and sometimes some people agree.

I think it would be VERY important to see how Jesus looked at the OT. After all, He is your teacher, correct? Can you only learn from a teacher directly? Can you not watch what he does with others and listen to his answers to others and how he responds to information, etc.? Can you only learn one-on-one or can you also learn in a classroom?

Isnâ??t it clear from the Bible that the Pharisees were not following Truth? So why would I learn from them? There is a thing called discernment, Paul.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

How did the early church fathers regard the NT?

Paul - Why would you want to know that? Would you simply trust whatever they told you?

There is a difference in wanting to know how the early church fathers regarded the NT and simply trusting whatever they say. Weâ??re hitting upon discernment again, Paul. If you can only learn one-on-one with Jesus then please donâ??t read the scriptures or listen to anything others say or read anything others write. And your church should only teach ONE concept - â??Everyone, go spend time with Jesus. He will teach you everything. You donâ??t need to come here for teaching.â? Is that what your church teaches?

Questions are good. I ask them often. But it's important to know who to trust for answers.

I trust God.

You have written this a zillion times, Paul. We have never argued this point. Do you remember what exactly the issue was that we disagreed on? It wasnâ??t about trusting God.

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ May 5 2007, 03:44 PM)

I think we can both agree that neither of us thinks the other is hearing from God.

Paul - That is not what I believe, Freedom in Truth.

I simply believe there are some things you just don't know about yet, or haven't heard about yet, or haven't even thought about yet... which is why I think it would help you to get into specific issues.

I don't believe God has NOT taught you anything or has taught you anything. I simply don't know if God has taught you anything.

You donâ??t know if God has taught me anything or not. You think I hear from God but havenâ??t been taught anything by Him? Interesting.

The rest of your post is repetitive so I cut for length.

Do you believe the verbs â??to understandâ? and â??to agreeâ? are synonymous? You seem to. I do not believe they are synonyms. I can understand you and NOT agree. I have studied Mormon teachings. I find they do not add to Godâ??s Truth but contradict it. That is not misunderstanding you, Paul - that is disagreeing.

[Freedom in Truth]

I just want to say one more time before the thread closes that I know God has taught me some things.

... and that means I also know it is God who has taught me those things.

You can disagree if you want, but that won't change in the least the fact that I know who is God.

I want, and I do disagree! . . . though I agree that this is what you think!

[Paul Ray]

No. It was a serious question. I thought TCM might consider all the interpretation styles valid. And you seem to think that all interpretations are from God - itâ??s just that God tells some people more than others or whatever.

I don't know who or what gave you the idea that I believed all interpretations are valid, but it certainly wasn't me. And even if you did think I thought that, you should have known that I didn't when I said "Obviously not". I get the feeling you really don't listen to people, including me, when people tell you something.

I wouldnâ??t think God gives someone an invalid interpretation, would you?

Please listen carefully:

Obviously not. I don't believe God tells people different things on the same exact issue.

I think it would be VERY important to see how Jesus looked at the OT.

Me too. And I try to see that by asking God to guide my understanding when I am trying to understand the OT. And I don't accept what other people tell me they think about how Jesus looked at the OT unless God personally assures me their understanding is true. I always go to God, directly, for my answers.

After all, He is your teacher, correct?

Correct.

Can you only learn from a teacher directly?

Yes. And I do.

Can you not watch what he does with others and listen to his answers to others and how he responds to information, etc.?

Yes, but if I rely on my own understanding of what he is saying to others, I might get a misunderstanding, so I always ask him directly if I understand him correctly. I do not rely upon my own understanding, or the understanding of others who are not God.

Can you only learn one-on-one or can you also learn in a classroom?

Ask my teachers. They are the ones who grade how well I am learning. Just don't expect me to rely on what you say my teachers have told me. I can always go to my teachers directly.

Isnâ??t it clear from the Bible that the Pharisees were not following Truth?

Do you think they knew they were not following Truth? I think they thought they were, but they really were not. At least not about some things the Teacher was trying to teach them.

Try asking yourself a few questions. You need not post your answers:

What can I do to avoid making the same mistakes many of the Pharisees made?

How can I know when I truly do know what is the truth?

Most Pharisees were studious of all the scriptures, but they couldn't see the Truth in front of them.

So why would I learn from them?

I think they offered us a good example of what to NOT do, and we should avoid repeating their errors.

There is a thing called discernment, Paul.

Yes. I know that. And I know God can help us to know what is true.

There is a difference in wanting to know how the early church fathers regarded the NT and simply trusting whatever they say. Weâ??re hitting upon discernment again, Paul.

Yes. I know that. For some reason you want to keep repeating your message. I do not know why.

I know God can help me know what is true, and God does. I see no reason to believe God really doesn't.

If you can only learn one-on-one with Jesus then please donâ??t read the scriptures or listen to anything others say or read anything others write.

I think you don't correctly understand me, and how I come to know what is true. I have tried to tell you, several times, repeatedly, but for some reason you don't understand my answers.

All the words I read and/or hear from other people simply give me ideas to ponder, and they are ideas that I might not have or think about otherwise without someone to prompt me with that information. I do read the scriptures, and I listen to my leaders, but to know the truth I depend on God's assurance. I don't just accept what other people write or say vocally.

You seem to think I need you to tell me I am learning from God, or that I am NOT learning from God, but I don't learn from God by accepting what you have to tell me. I learn from God by learning from God, directly, when I ask God about any ideas I have and God then tells me what God thinks about them.

When you read the Book of Mormon I think you are only reading some words without knowing and/or believing they are scriptures, but I believe God would tell you they are truly scriptures if you would ask God and rely on His answer. And I believe that because God told me God inspired them... referring to the words and ideas in the Book of Mormon.

And your church should only teach ONE concept - â??Everyone, go spend time with Jesus. He will teach you everything. You donâ??t need to come here for teaching.â? Is that what your church teaches?

Yes and no. The leaders of the Church do teach us to do that, but they don't teach us to ONLY do that. The leaders of the Church give us information, and they recommend that we ask God for a testimony to assure us about what God really wants us to believe. And when God assures us, we then know what is true. And we also know it was God who answered us.

Do you realize the fact that all the scriptures we have, including the ones you have in the Holy Bible, originally came from people who were inspired and authorized by God to teach others people? The scriptures we have are from people, and those people wrote as well as spoke what God taught them.

The words of our (LDS) leaders, in our Church, also write down what God teaches them, and they also teach us vocally. And we can know God does inspire and authorize them to teach us by God assuring us, personally, that God agrees with what they are saying... and God in fact did inspire them.

And we don't read only from people who once lived in the past and accept what God says they were saying. We also learn from our leaders today, when God personally assures us God approves of their message.

And I know this, for myself, personally because God has personally assured me that what I have learned is what God wants me to know.

You have written this a zillion times, Paul. We have never argued this point. Do you remember what exactly the issue was that we disagreed on? It wasnâ??t about trusting God.

In the final analysis, I believe it is about trusting God, personally.

How do you know God inspired men to write the Holy Bible, or certain books/ letters that are in it?

If you know that because God has told you, personally, that God did, then you are learning the same way I learn things. And if that's the way you learn things, then you should not be surprised when I don't simply accept what you tell me... about anything. I trust God to help me know what is true.

And btw, what is it you still hope to accomplish in this thread?

[Freedom in Truth]

Actually, I think it's central to the discussion, because if you are making faulty assumptions, then your arguments and conclusions are likewise going to be messed up. I think it might be a good idea to reevaluate some of your foundational claims, if only so that your arguments can be more palatable to a rational mind. Perhaps you could spend some time in the other thread in hopes of gaining more understanding on the matter. Maybe voice some of your own concerns there, as well.

As far as "rational mind" - that would be your opinion, of course. I am pretty sure Mormons feel their beliefs are rational, though one never knows!

Are there any Mormons reading this that DON'T believe Mormonism is rational? (Please only respond if you believe Mormonism and DON'T think it is rational!)

[Paul Ray]

As far as "rational mind" - that would be your opinion, of course. I am pretty sure Mormons feel their beliefs are rational, though one never knows!

Are there any Mormons reading this that DON'T believe Mormonism is rational? (Please only respond if you believe Mormonism and DON'T think it is rational!)

I think it would help you to understand our reasoning on specific issues.

... and there are all kinds of issues we can discuss with you.

I think you're on right track by thinking we think our beliefs are reasonable.

I think you now need to understand our reasoning.

[Freedom in Truth]

Obviously not. I don't believe God tells people different things on the same exact issue.

Then you cannot believe I hear from God. For example, if I tell you (as I have) that God the Father says He was never a man like us or that we will never be gods like Him, then God has told me something different than you say He has told you on the same exact issue. But you say you donâ??t know whether or not I hear from God?? At the very least you must believe I only hear from God sometimes. Who am I hearing from on this issue?

Me too. And I try to see that by asking God to guide my understanding when I am trying to understand the OT. And I don't accept what other people tell me they think about how Jesus looked at the OT unless God personally assures me their understanding is true. I always go to God, directly, for my answers.

I guess you donâ??t trust the NT and what it records about how Jesus looked at the OT.

Maybe you could ask God if you can trust the NT.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Can you only learn from a teacher directly?

Paul - Yes. And I do.

Iâ??m sorry.

Yes, but if I rely on my own understanding of what he is saying to others, I might get a misunderstanding, so I always ask him directly if I understand him correctly. I do not rely upon my own understanding, or the understanding of others who are not God.

When you ask Him if you understand you are relying on your understanding of His answer, unless you always get â??yesâ? or â??noâ? answers. Do you always get â??yesâ? or â??noâ? answers?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Isnâ??t it clear from the Bible that the Pharisees were not following Truth?

Paul - Do you think they knew they were not following Truth? I think they thought they were, but they really were not. At least not about some things the Teacher was trying to teach them.

Whether or not they thought they were following Truth is not the issue here, Paul.

Most Pharisees were studious of all the scriptures, but they couldn't see the Truth in front of them.

I agree.

I think they offered us a good example of what to NOT do, and we should avoid repeating their errors.

This is not learning from them - their knowledge - being taught by them - but learning from the example they give. That is not what I meant when I posed the question.

I know God can help me know what is true, and God does. I see no reason to believe God really doesn't.

God can help us all know what is true if we let Him.

All the words I read and/or hear from other people simply give me ideas to ponder, and they are ideas that I might not have or think about otherwise without someone to prompt me with that information. I do read the scriptures, and I listen to my leaders, but to know the truth I depend on God's assurance. I don't just accept what other people write or say vocally.

Is there a scriptural example of your method - asking God whether something is true or not? Did Jesus ever say something like â??O-K everyone, thatâ??s my teaching for today. Now go and ask God if I spoke truth.â?? I know what Paul said - he said to test the spirits by examining the scriptures. I donâ??t think you ever addressed my question about this.

When you read the Book of Mormon I think you are only reading some words without knowing and/or believing they are scriptures, but I believe God would tell you they are truly scriptures if you would ask God and rely on His answer. And I believe that because God told me God inspired them... referring to the words and ideas in the Book of Mormon.

I have asked God about the BoM. Apparently you donâ??t accept this.

Do you realize the fact that all the scriptures we have, including the ones you have in the Holy Bible, originally came from people who were inspired and authorized by God to teach others people? The scriptures we have are from people, and those people wrote as well as spoke what God taught them.

Yup.

The words of our (LDS) leaders, in our Church, also write down what God teaches them, and they also teach us vocally. And we can know God does inspire and authorize them to teach us by God assuring us, personally, while helping us to undertand what they're saying.

Nope. Donâ??t agree.

How do you know God inspired men to write the Holy Bible, or certain books/ letters that are in it?

That sounds like a topic for another thread.

If you know that because God has told you, personally, that God did, then you are learning the same way I learn things. And if that's the way you learn things, then you should not be surprised when I don't simply accept what you tell me... about anything. I trust God to help me know what is true.

Havenâ??t I said I donâ??t expect you to accept what I say?

And btw, what is it you still hope to accomplish in this thread?

Not a thing but to answer and address posters who are still posting out of respect for the poster.

[Freedom in Truth]

I think it would help you to understand our reasoning on specific issues.

... and there are all kinds of issues we can discuss with you.

I think you're on right track by thinking we think our beliefs are reasonable.

I think you now need to understand our reasoning.

I guess you don't know how many Mormon articles I have read, etc. It seems that in your thinking if I understood your reasoning I would agree. We're back to the verbs "to understand" and "to agree" being synonymous.

Can you honestly NOT imagine that I could understand Mormon reasoning and still not agree???

[Paul Ray]

I guess you don't know how many Mormon articles I have read, etc. It seems that in your thinking if I understood your reasoning I would agree.

No, but at least you would understand our reasoning.

Here are a few tests to see if you understand our reasoning.

1) Our (LDS) understanding of God is in harmony with what is written in the Bible about God.

True or False?

2) The Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon can be understood to be in harmony with each other.

True or False?

3) Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God just as other people have been true prophets of God.

True or False?

If you need extra space, feel free to write on the back or add another page for your answers.

[TrashcanMan79]

No, but at least you would understand our reasoning.

Here are a few tests to see if you understand our reasoning.

1) Our (LDS) understanding of God is in harmony with what is written in the Bible about God.

True or False?

2) The Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon can be understood to be in harmony with each other.

True or False?

3) Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God just as other people have been true prophets of God.

True or False?

If you need extra space, feel free to write on the back or add another page for your answers.

I liked the wording of your second question, and I think your first and third could benefit from similar phrasing. Like,

1) The LDS concept of God can be understood to be in harmony with the Biblical data.

and

3) The LDS concept of Joseph Smith's prophethood can be understood to be in harmony with the Biblical model of prophets.

What do you think?

[Paul Ray]

I liked the wording of your second question, and I think your first and third could benefit from similar phrasing. Like,

1) The LDS concept of God can be understood to be in harmony with the Biblical data.

and

3) The LDS concept of Joseph Smith's prophethood can be understood to be in harmony with the Biblical model of prophets.

What do you think?

Okay, I'll accept those as your answers.

But according to LDS reasoning, they all are in harmony.

If you can think it is possible, you are closer to our understanding, but you are not quite there yet.

And btw, the correct answers to all 3 questions that I had in mind are "True", "True" and "True"

[TrashcanMan79]

In response to TCMâ??s link, Post #482 -

I've started a new thread: The Bible: Unique In Its Continuity?

[TrashcanMan79]

Okay, I'll accept those as your answers.

Those were not my answers, per se, but a suggestion to maybe improve the wording of the 'test' intended for FIT. But, yes, I do believe that anyone can 'harmonize' their beliefs with the Bible, so long as they interpret the Bible to not undermine their beliefs!

[Neighbor]

No, but at least you would understand our reasoning.

Here are a few tests to see if you understand our reasoning.

1) Our (LDS) understanding of God is in harmony with what is written in the Bible about God.

True or False?

2) The Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon can be understood to be in harmony with each other.

True or False?

3) Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God just as other people have been true prophets of God.

True or False?

If you need extra space, feel free to write on the back or add another page for your answers.

The latest newsletter from the Tanners came in the mailbox today. These remind me of the questions it says started them to studying matters more deeply. There is more disagreement between the POGP and BOM than there is between the Bible and BOM. Go figure. It must be hard to reconsile the LDS books.

So how does a Mormon who believes the BOM is true and the most correct book on earth concerning the gospel reconcile that the latter books added disagree with say,,,the nature and person of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? I'm really serious. How do you discern that both can possibly be teaching full restored truth when they don't agree???

In keeping with the post topic - how is that discerned?