Infallibility

[Balzer]

That shouldn't keep ypu from answering Cal's question.

I was trying to play coy, but if you're going to force the issue, I would reject the LDS prophet(s) and the "scripture" that LDS beleive to be in the Book of Mormon, et cet.

Respectfully,

Balzer

[Monster]

There are a few basic doctrines which are infallible: the atonement, the existence and nature of God, etc. etc. - info contained within the 13 articles of faith - as for the rest? Most information is contextual / relativistic / so as Jesus told the scribes / Pharisees... you have to go with the spirit of the thing, not the letter of it...

What makes those infallible any more than any other doctrine?

[Nathair/|\]

I was trying to play coy, but if you're going to force the issue, I would reject the LDS prophet(s) and the "scripture" that LDS beleive to be in the Book of Mormon, et cet.

Respectfully,

Balzer

In post 14, you stated that one should not rely on anyone but Jesus. This would of necessity mean that even the prophets of the Bible can be thrown out, which was Cal's point.

[Arkholt]

Only God is infallible. That's kind of the definition. There's a reason why we have prophets and their revelations as well as our own personal revelation. It's ridiculous to think any mortal being besides Christ would be perfect, or that any of their works would be perfect. Saying that prophets and scriptures are infallible is just an excuse for people to get mad when other people question them.

[thesometimesaint]

God is perfect, and infallible. We mortals are not, though we do believe that someday we too will be.

[Balzer]

In post 14, you stated that one should not rely on anyone but Jesus. This would of necessity mean that even the prophets of the Bible can be thrown out, which was Cal's point.

Then you and Cal misunderstood my point. (a common occurence with my points)

I was responding to the post that said: "A prophet helps us hold to the iron rod, a church without one, any church, soon distances itself from God. So if you have a prophet leading your church, then little else does matter since it will be God leading your church, not books, not ideas, and not debates."

As I understood it, that poster was not referring to the prophets of the Bible, he was referring to the living prophet(s) of the Mormon church, and posits that without a living prophet my church will soon become distanced from God. This is false. Jesus heads my church, and He will never distance me from God.

Respectfully,

Balzer

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 07 May 2011 - 10:04 AM, said:

A prophet helps us hold to the iron rod, a church without one, any church, soon distances itself from God. So if you have a prophet leading your church, then little else does matter since it will be God leading your church, not books, not ideas, and not debates.

I should think that a church, any church, that relies on anyone other than Jesus to "hold to the iron rod," would soon distance itself from God.

Respectfully,

Balzer

If one understands the definition of a prophet, being a person upon the earth who speaks for God, then you really aren't relying on the man, so much as the Jesus who directs the man. The assumption made was that all were in uniform accordance as to what a prophet is, my apologies for assuming as much. I will be more clear in the future so as to help those who might be confused by the term prophet or prophet of God.

[changed]

Some things, like the atonement, are pretty central. yes, we do not fully understand the atonement, atone - "at one with Christ" we are not yet at one with Christ, but our ability to progress depends on believing in and accepting the Atonement - anyone who has fully gone through the repentance process can testify of the reality of the atonement. It is an individual path, individual testimonies of it are gained through going through individual repentance processes - no borrowed light, borrowed oil in anyone's lamps - impossible to communicate fully in words/scripture/lecture what it is because knowledge only comes through personal experience which cannot be given to another... but the atonement is real, Jesus really came to Earth, he really died for us that we might live, he really felt our pains and has born our grief - those who have gone to him in a time of sorrow and have felt his presence in their lives know this... those who have enough faith to take the first few steps down the road will come to know of this.

We do not know it all...

...we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things...

but we do know some truths...

"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, "

Our beliefs are built upon the sure foundation of Jesus Christ, and it is possible to increase in our knowledge of him through those simple acts of church/temple attendance, prayer, scripture study, repentance, following the guidance of prophets and of the Spirit. It is possible to know of him, and to progress in becoming more like him. To deny our ability to learn and grow by saying "it's impossible to know" is to deny pretty much everything. It is possible to gain a knowledge of God...

http://lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-joseph-smith/chapter-22-gaining-knowledge-of-eternal-truths?lang=eng&query=knowledge

[Calm]

Then you and Cal misunderstood my point. (a common occurence with my points)

I was responding to the post that said: "A prophet helps us hold to the iron rod, a church without one, any church, soon distances itself from God. So if you have a prophet leading your church, then little else does matter since it will be God leading your church, not books, not ideas, and not debates."

As I understood it, that poster was not referring to the prophets of the Bible, he was referring to the living prophet(s) of the Mormon church, and posits that without a living prophet my church will soon become distanced from God. This is false. Jesus heads my church, and He will never distance me from God.

Respectfully,

Balzer

The prophets of the Bible were the living prophets at the time they wrote their particular scriptures. The only difference I can see in your qualifications posted here is that they lived long ago while the prophets you dismiss have lived in more recent times....reminds me of a scripture or two about honouring the dead prophets while murdering the living ones.

[zerinus]

I've always believed that the Bible (as originally inspired) is doctrinally infallible.

As a Mormon, I would tend to view The Book of Mormon the same way, but is that how Mormons view it?

I've seen it suggested that the Nephite prophets believed that Jesus and The Father were the same person, and that there was only one God, but were mistaken.

Is that possible?

Does it matter?

Is the Book of Mormon (as originally written on the gold plates, or as translated by JS) doctrinally infallible?

Is that the way latter day saints here view it?

Can you confirm for me what your own religious persuasion is? Are you Mormon, Evan, or something else? I find it helpful to know that when I am talking religion with someone.

[inquiringmind]

Can you confirm for me what your own religious persuasion is? Are you Mormon, Evan, or something else? I find it helpful to know that when I am talking religion with someone.

No I can't, because I don't know myself.

[zerinus]

No I can't, because I don't know myself.

That doesn't seem to agree with this:

I've always believed that the Bible (as originally inspired) is doctrinally infallible.

So you must believe something. I like to know what it is.

[inquiringmind]

That doesn't seem to agree with this:

So you must believe something. I like to know what it is.

Thank you.

Let's say you're right, and I do believe SOMETHING.

There are certainly things that I don't want to deny (even if I question them.)

What I can't do is tell you that I believe in your Church, the Catholic Church,The Orthodox Church or The Evangelical Protestant Church

(And I'm sorry if that confusses or offends you.)

What I'm interested in here is whether Mormons believe their scripturs are doctrinally infallible?

Is it possible they contain errors?

(And could those errors be more than minor historical errors?)

[CV75]

What I'm interested in here is whether Mormons believe their scripturs are doctrinally infallible?

Is it possible they contain errors?

(And could those errors be more than minor historical errors?)

Jesus corrected one potential imperfection (3 Nephi 23). Mormon speaks of the writers’ imperfections and whatever imperfection they might have passed into the record (Mormon 8: 12; 9: 30-34; 10: 2-7), suggesting also that imperfection and what is important (or not) about them is in the eye of the beholder (Ether 12: 22-29). But imperfection is also very different from being false or incorrect. So if one sees imperfections as errors, then yes, they are contained in the scriptures. But imperfections need not be a stumbling block and the Spirit will draw people to and witness of the truth contained in them.

[epiginosko]

inquiringmind, I don't know if we are the right people to ask. Unless there are any Apostles on the board, none of us can make any official statements on behalf of the entire church. What I can say is that there seems to be tolerance for a diversity of views on this. I think you will find members in good standing who believe that the scriptures are inerrant and infallible, infallible but not inerrant, or both. The official statement of the Church can be found in the 8th Article of Faith:

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God."

Note that it does not make a declaration of fallibility or errancy, only that the scriptures are the Word of God as far as they are translated correctly. Take from that what you will.

The most important thing is that the scriptures lead us to a knowledge of Christ. Of His role as Savior and Redeemer, and as the only one who is able to atone for our sins and present us before the Father. In that message, I would argue all of the LDS the scriptures to be infallible.

[TAO]

Thank you.

Let's say you're right, and I do believe SOMETHING.

There are certainly things that I don't want to deny (even if I question them.)

If I may suggest, it is important to get over all doubts about something, as a solid base. It's how faith is built. You need a strong rock of Christ, no weaknesses or holes or gaps in it which can be taken advantage of. No questioning of the rock, in other words.

So I ask you... which things, do you not question? Which things are you as sure about as your name is inquiring mind (at least on this forum)?

From those things, may bridges be built; may understanding be made =).

What I can't do is tell you that I believe in your Church, the Catholic Church,The Orthodox Church or The Evangelical Protestant Church

That's fine, I don't believe in Church's either XD. It's not so much a matter of my church versus someone else's... it's... for me... I have a faith in the spirit of the book... and I have a faith in the prophets, and Father, and Christ. That is good enough for me, yeah, I'm not so sure God wants it so much to be a competition contest... he wants us to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent (hey, what do you know, another very truthful good thing, the scout law =D.)

(And I'm sorry if that confusses or offends you.)

Nah, no prob. And even if we were offended, we shouldn't show it. That's what charity is =D.

What I'm interested in here is whether Mormons believe their scripturs are doctrinally infallible?

Are the scriptures fallible. Yep. Is the spirit that comes from them infallible? Nope.

You have perhaps heard of one misprint they had in the BoM where they switched Benjamin and Mosiah's name. Fallible, there, that it is. But is the spirit that comes from that, knowing it was a small error that is now fixed, still good? Yes. As Mudcat says... it's the spirit of infallibility, the spirit of Christ which is given and gives to all men, that is the one thing you want to trust with all your heart. It will teach and guide you to what things are honest, true, benevolent, virtuous... (hey, another very truthful and good thing, the Articles of Faith =D.)

Is it possible they contain errors?

Yep. Just told you one. Also... considering punctuation... the origianal BoM had none. Could some have been misplaced? Yeah. But is it still very good, and very spiritually fulfilling. Yeah, very much so. I would say small errors like that, in the end, do not really matter as much as the spirit does.

(And could those errors be more than minor historical errors?)

Yeah, that could happen too. But I tend to think it happens not, or it happens rarely. Prophets, writers, and others in the BoM were men... capable of error and mistakes. But were they still good and righteous men? Yeah. And I don't think that much... if hardly any of the Book contains this problem. The Bible... well let's say even it can only be identified in a few choice places. For example... with some of the scriptures saying 'no man can see God'... and all but two have an 'except' next to them, if I remember right. Those two... perhaps the person was at err... or perhaps he didn't mention there was an exception. We do not know. It matters not though. The spirit of Christ will direct you to what is right, and what is wrong, so trust in him =).

Best Wishes,

TAO

P.S. Oh... one thing... the verses that are most likely to be infallible are the ones from the BoM where the Lord is directly speaking, I believe (like parts of Ether 12). Or also Book of Abraham, Book of Moses. Very little time to change, and very little men have their hands on them, so to say. So I would put my trust in those with all my heart, that I would. Indeed, Ether 12 is a marvelous chapter. I love it. A lot. =D. The spirit is good =). And that is what helps me know it is true... without the spirit, I would be a lost man indeed I would! =D.

[Questing Beast]

God is perfect, and infallible. We mortals are not, though we do believe that someday we too will be.

Inconceivable. No finite being will ever attain perfection. It is possible we can be "perfect" in finite, empirical ways, but in our knowledge we will always be behind the cusp of eternally expanding infinity....

[inquiringmind]

From another thread

Perhaps the BOM supports the Aristotelian concept of a first cause.

2Nephi 2:

And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.

[14] And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.

"Things to act" and "things to be acted upon" are phrases often associated with Aristotelian prime mover arguments.

I believe a past president and prophet of the Church said that the things that act are intelligences, and the things that are acted upon are elements (or matter.)

I don't see any way this quote can be reconciled with Joseph's King Follet sermon, and these are the kind of things I have in mind when I ask if it's possible that the BOM actually contains doctrinal errors (i.e. the human reasoning and opinions of the prophets who wrote the words, or the understanding of JS at the time he translated the plates--the latter of which would seem to me to raise other questions, since he's believed to have translated them under divine inspiration.)

[Lightbearer]

I should think that a church, any church, that relies on anyone other than Jesus to "hold to the iron rod," would soon distance itself from God.

Respectfully,

Balzer

We do not rely on anyone other than Jesus, because the "rod of Iron" is the word of God... either written or spoken through His Prophets and Apostles. You cannot seperate the vine from the branches just as you cannot separate the revelations of Jesus Christ from the Church. So as long as God continues to reveal His will to His Church then it is His Church. You only distance yourself from God when you deny His revelations.

[Lightbearer]

Inconceivable. No finite being will ever attain perfection. It is possible we can be "perfect" in finite, empirical ways, but in our knowledge we will always be behind the cusp of eternally expanding infinity....

What makes us finite? Death? The veil? We are eternal beings, we are in this mortal school and of necessity must have our mortal minds veiled so that we can function as finite beings, but God who blesses us with His spirit can enable us to overcome the veil and after our resurrection and we are restored to be infinte beings then we will have all perfection. This cannot be while remain in this mortal flesh, but when this mortal shall put on immortality then we shall be even as He is if we have been faithful in this estate. Then we can have glory added upon our heads forever.

[Questing Beast]

What makes us finite? Death? The veil? We are eternal beings, we are in this mortal school and of necessity must have our mortal minds veiled so that we can function as finite beings, but God who blesses us with His spirit can enable us to overcome the veil and after our resurrection and we are restored to be infinte beings then we will have all perfection. This cannot be while remain in this mortal flesh, but when this mortal shall put on immortality then we shall be even as He is if we have been faithful in this estate. Then we can have glory added upon our heads forever.

Our physical presence is finite. Our brain pans are finite. We can live forever and yet we remain finite. Immortality does not remove the finite aspect of our existence; we are "stuck" in a linear progression within space-time. Literally, the only EXISTENCE to us is this very moment. Everything else our minds contemplate is either future/imagination, or past/history and immutable. It takes "God" intervening to overrule space-time for us: and "God" is the ONLY INFINITE EXISTENCE....

[thesometimesaint]

Questing Beast:

God is not a finite being. We are. We don't know what God knows, but at the very least he knows enough to bring me back to him.

[epiginosko]

Inconceivable.

You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means.

http://youtu.be/D58LpHBnvsI

[TAO]

From another thread

I believe a past president and prophet of the Church said that the things that act are intelligences, and the things that are acted upon are elements (or matter.)

I don't see any way this quote can be reconciled with Joseph's King Follet sermon, and these are the kind of things I have in mind when I ask if it's possible that the BOM actually contains doctrinal errors (i.e. the human reasoning and opinions of the prophets who wrote the words, or the understanding of JS at the time he translated the plates--the latter of which would seem to me to raise other questions, since he's believed to have translated them under divine inspiration.)

If I may, I think that quote means that some things that are matter, may later, become the actors.

Let's say, for example, I touch a rock. It moves and hits another rock. It has acted upon the other rock, even though I acted upon it first.

Thus the actor becomes the acted, and the acted, the actor.

But still, this doesn't tell us, what are you certain of? 0.o

Sorry, it's just that's the best way to start =D.

Best Wishes,

TAO =P

Sorry if I am annoying.