Bom: Do We Really Need It?

[Avatar4321]

I'm working on your other question, and that will take a while to write. Here, what you just said is one of the major reasons I converted. Mormons live out the admonitions of Jesus Christ better than any other church I have ever experienced full stop.

 

And we still fall far below what we should live.

Which is precisely why we need the Book of Mormon. It's one of the most powerful tools in conversion. It was through the Book of Mormon I truly began to understand why the Atonement was so important.

[daz2]

I have not read every post.  Very few of the people we taught or baptized in Mexico read the entire Book of Mormon or even significant amounts before being baptized.  Obviously, many of those individuals did not stay, but there did not seem to be any connection I could see between whether or how much they had read or understood the Book of Mormon and whether they joined or whether they stayed.  The First Vision was not a big deal there.  That is (this is 40 years ago) the secularism and empiricism and rationalism that permeates our culture had not permeated the cultures of the people we taught--it was not hard to believe that a 14 year old boy had seen God, in part because they knew or knew of friends or family or extended family members who had had similar experiences in connecting with the Divine, visions, even seeing God.  As far as I could tell, it was not the convincing of people of specific truth claims (like the BofM or First Vision) that led to conversion and retention, but their overall belief and feeling that this was God's Church and that they wanted to be a part of it.  That is, conversion seemed to be a multi-faceted thing.  I think the same is true for those of us who have been in the Church a long time.  Different aspects have different levels of importance to us. 

[why me]

You just made my point! All of these people came to a knowing about JS' prophetic mantle without reading a word of the BOM. Just as I've known many people to come to faith in Christ without reading a word of the Bible.

I'm not at all downplaying spiritual experiences. I'm simply saying that presenting the BOM as factual "proof" of JS' mantle seems to be counterproductive in the Internet age.

The lds church is a church of spiritual experiences. You are right that spiritual experiences can be had in many instances and situations when one is a member of the lds church. However, unless one develops a testimony of the book of mormon that testimony can be under threat unless a connection is made between spiritual experiences and the book of mormon. They all go together in one nice package.

 

The book of mormon and how it came about is a wonderful testament. To imagine 11 people lying about their spiritual experience with the book is quite hard to believe. And then we have emma who firmly believed in the book and she certainly would have known it was a fraud. This is a testimony in itself.

[EllenMaksoud]

As a fellow convert, I'm really interested in your thoughts here.  I agree that the Church's very best friends are the anti-Mormons.    They strengthened my testimony in the CHURCH as well.  However, I can't say they did much for my testimony about the BOM.  Did their arguments against the BOM persuade you of its truth?

I think I always knew that God existed.  I think that knowledge of him is written in our very cells.  In my years as an Evangelical, I was devout, and studied the Bible a lot. One of my issues with the the church is that they believed that God suddenly stopped talking to us after Jesus Christ. It was obvious that was not true because he used Martin Luther, and John Wycliffe and others down through the ages.

 

One of the reasons I converted to Islam was that God (Allah SWT ) spoke to man again through the prophet Muhammad PBUH, and gave him the holy Qur’an. Like Christianity, Islam quickly left the true path after Rasoolallah died. Over the years, Islam became hard because they do not fully recognize Isa PBUH (Jesus Christ) and that bothered me.

 

So, when I was PUT with the Mormon Missionaries, it was easier to believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet because I believed in the other prophets including Muhammad PBUH. It was easier to believe in the BOM because I believed in the Qur’an and the Bible. And, Heavenly Father met my needs perfectly. A Muslim woman just does not casually talk to men. So Heavenly Father gave me Sister Missionaries. Then, there was the vision. Many Mormons will tell you that “things” happen at Kirtland. On the day I was driving north through Kirtland, the sight of the original temple fascinated me. And then, in my mind’s eye, I saw a man in white armour, sitting on a white horse and pointing with a sword, saying Stop!

 

That led to a series of events that eventually led me to the Kirtland visitor’s center and to meeting the Sisters there.

 

Additionally, if there are doubts about Joseph Smith, then how about the rest of the prophets? If there are doubts about the plates, then what about the 10 commandments that were given on stone tablets? And, by reading the BOM, it becomes apparent that he knew the Bible intimately and that nothing in the Book of Mormon conflicts with the Bible.

 

Ultimately, what would carry the day, as you say, Mormons do better at living the words of Jesus Christ in spirit and truth than any other experience I’ve had.

[Duncan]

Okay. So I'm starting to see why we need the Book of Mormon but I'm still not convinced that we should LEAD with it, given the difficulties with its historicity.

For example, Protestants don't start with Jonah's promise - "Pray to know the truth that a man could be swallowed by a whale and survive for three days unharmed despite all of the biological evidence to the contrary and then you will know that Jesus is the Savior of the world." Sure, many Protestants believe in the literal truth of the Jonah narrative but it does not form the BASIS of their testimony.

In contrast, I was introduced to this church with the following: "Pray to know the truth that ancient white Jews from Palestine sailed to America and populated the New World despite considerable archeological and genetic evidence to the contrary and you will know that Jesus is the Messiah and that His Church has been restored in these latter-days."

I eventually came to a testimony about the Church by testing it against Jesus' definition in John 13:35 (they shall know that you are my disciples by your love for one another). That is a testimony that can't be wrested away by Internet posters, whether they be renown archeologists or snarky anti-Mormons.

 

 

as a missionary we were told to build on common beliefs which is good but what is more about Mormonism, why should someone join our Church that is supposedly just as good as theirs if we believe all the same things? Joseph and Hyrum didn't die for the welfare program, Mitt Romney, Donny Osmond or Harry Reid but as John Taylor said "To seal the testimony of this book and the Book of Mormon, we announce the martyrdom of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and Hyrum Smith the Patriarch." 

[EllenMaksoud]

And we still fall far below what we should live.

Which is precisely why we need the Book of Mormon. It's one of the most powerful tools in conversion. It was through the Book of Mormon I truly began to understand why the Atonement was so important.

Well Mormons are human. Some of us struggle with pushing the limits out of ignorance and curiosity. Some of us are devout because they already experienced the devastation of sin in their lives and want no more of it. Some were flat out rescued by the action of Heavenly Father and now practice gratefulness in a whole new way.

[Danzo]

I understand what the OP is getting at.  The BOM is the word of God and was revealed to add to our testimony of the Savior and provide the scripturally required "second witness".

But at the same time, what unique Mormon doctrines were restored in the BOM as opposed to the D&C?  What does the BOM teach us about God or the gospel that wasn't in the Bible?  Most of our newly restored doctrines came from other sources.

It's also interesting the the GA's didn't quote the BOM very much at all in their discourses for the first 50+ years of the church.  Even Joseph Smith rarely referred to it.

 

I believe that the BOM is true and that its restoration alone is a testimony of that fact and of Joseph's divine calling.  I believe that Joseph meant it when he said it was the most correct and we should abide by its precepts.  But what part of the gospel would we lose without its teachings?

 

Probably the reason they didn't preach it right away is that they were still discovering it themselves.

 

The church and its doctrines could exist without the Book of Mormon or the Bible (the new testament Christians didn't have the bible)

 

That being said, I don't think the doctrines of the atonement are taught anywhere better.

 

I think that it shows that the lord pays attention to more than just a strip of desert between the Mediterranean sea and the river Jordan.

 

I think it answers the question of continuing revelation quite clearly.

 

I think it preaches the gospel of Christ very clearly.

 

Since it has been sanctified by the lord, reading it brings the spirit in ones life. (when I was a 19 year old virgin, It amazed me how someone reading it without knowing much about it would almost always feel the spirit)

 

I feel the lord in my life much more when I read it on a daily basis.  I have read it probably 30 times, and I still seem to get new things out of it.

[thesometimesaint]

One of my stumbling blocks in finally gaining a testimony about the Church was the BOM itself. When I was investigating the Church, I was told to pray about the truth of the BOM as a way of verifying that JS was a prophet. So I went home and sought answers from the source of all truth -- the Internet. Like many people, I won't even try out a new restaurant without first looking it up online. So if you ask me to try out a whole new religion, I'm going to Google it.

And while you may KNOW that the BOM is true, this is not the consensus of the Internet. Regardless of the ultimate truth, Mormons are simply outnumbered. The number of people presenting arguments against the BOM dwarfs the people in support of it. In the end, the Internet made a pretty convincing case that you're all a bunch of wackos (the technical term according to the Internet). It took almost three years for my KNOWLEDGE of the Christ-like qualities of the members and the inspired policies of our leaders to overtake my doubts about the BOM. And I'm not sure it had to be that way.

What is the point of praying for a confirmation about the BOM when I could have just prayed for a confirmation that JS was a prophet? Isn't this the really important issue anyway?

After all, it was JS who announced the restoration; not the BOM. Nor did the BOM give us the sacred ordinances, the temple ceremonies or the organization of the Church. As I see it, almost all of the distinctive characteristics of Mormonism come from JS' revelations AFTER the translation of the BOM. And while the BOM may be "the most correct book on earth," perhaps we should treat it like "milk before meat" or as "pearls before swine".

Okay, so let me have it. What am I missing about the BOM that makes it so important to our faith and worth the loss of those who lose faith in its truthfulness or immediately write us off as a bunch of crazies?

 

Ad Populum really isn't a good way to determine truth.

 

The BoM confirms JS as a Prophet, and JS confirms the BoM as Scripture. They actually reinforce each other when combined with prayer.

 

The BoM establishes the foundation. The rest is just superstructure that depends on its foundation.

 

Without the BoM the whole edifice of the Church falls down. It is the keystone of our religion. With the BoM in place we can simply rebuild the Church, without it we are just another Protestant religion. That is why the critics must go after it.

[seriously honestly]

One doctrine the I like in the BOM is the doctrine of the Resurrection, which is not really explained whatsoever in the NT. Also as someone once noted the Bible says what happened and the Book of Mormon tells us why it happened

 

I'm looking it up on the LDS website, but do you (or anyone) have any examples off hand you think expain the Resurrection in the BOM that aren't explained in the Bible?

[mormonnewb]

The lds church is a church of spiritual experiences. You are right that spiritual experiences can be had in many instances and situations when one is a member of the lds church. However, unless one develops a testimony of the book of mormon that testimony can be under threat unless a connection is made between spiritual experiences and the book of mormon. They all go together in one nice package.

The book of mormon and how it came about is a wonderful testament. To imagine 11 people lying about their spiritual experience with the book is quite hard to believe. And then we have emma who firmly believed in the book and she certainly would have known it was a fraud. This is a testimony in itself.

The testimony of the witnesses is only evidence that there were gold plates. It is not evidence that JS correctly translated them. Nor is it evidence that, if correctly translated, the BOM is a true history (Gilgamesh has been translated into dozens of languages but it is still nonetheless fiction).

So think about it. For a new believer, it requires three steps of faith:

1. the plates were real

2. translation was accurate

3. author wrote an accurate history.

And I have to come to all three conclusions through the spirit. That seems a lot harder than just asking about JS.

[why me]

The testimony of the witnesses is only evidence that there were gold plates. It is not evidence that JS correctly translated them. Nor is it evidence that, if correctly translated, the BOM is a true history (Gilgamesh has been translated into dozens of languages but it is still nonetheless fiction).

 

I think that the point is that there were gold plates. And we need to remember that 3 witnesses just didn't see the plates. They also saw something else besides the plates. If a heavenly visitor showed 3 people the plates, your concern is not necessary.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

The BOM is the evidence that Joseph is a prophet.

Either it is scripture or it is not.

Not to mention without it we as like every other Church and the only reason to attend is that it is the one the most close to our house. It is just man made Church with no Apostles or Prophets.

[Calm]

newb, I would highly suggest if you haven't already getting Grant Hardy's Book of Mormon Reader and Understanding the Book of Mormon.

 

Amazon of course, but also available here with a fine collection of other books  you might find interesting...

 

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=761

 

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=1033

 

Both products added greatly to making my experience of reading the book more meaningful...it had been a real struggle recently to keep my mind on it while reading, too familiar with it so my mind would just phase out...the Reader changes the format into a much more natural form with natural divisions including putting poetry, songs and psalms into their correct structure.

 

The Understanding gives another dimension to study the book from which is very interesting and may tie the whole book together for you better.

[mormonnewb]

Not to mention without it we as like every other Church and the only reason to attend is that it is the one the most close to our house. It is just man made Church with no Apostles or Prophets.

So one must have written a book to be a true prophet? Don't tell that to Moses, Samuel, Elijah, et al.

I thought JS received the priesthood by divine ordination and not by virtue of publishing the BOM. Isn't that the real source of the restoration?

Edited January 15, 2014 by mormonnewb

[Duncan]

I'm looking it up on the LDS website, but do you (or anyone) have any examples off hand you think expain the Resurrection in the BOM that aren't explained in the Bible?

 

 

Alma 39-42 explains what it is, the NT talks about it but doesn't say what it is or how it works or why we need it

[Calm]

This may also be helpful:

 

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=54

 

Givens examines the Book of Mormon's role as a divine testament of the Last Days and as a sacred sign of Joseph Smith's status as a modern-day prophet. He assesses its claim to be a history of the pre-Columbian peopling of the Western Hemisphere, first by a small Old World group in the era of Babel, and later by tribes from Jerusalem in the age of Jeremiah. Givens explores how the Book of Mormon has been defined as a cultural product, the imaginative ravings of a rustic religion-maker more inspired by the winds of culture than the breath of God. He also investigates its status as a new American Bible or Fifth Gospel, displacing, supporting, or--in some views--perverting the canonical Word of God. Givens also probes the Book's shifting relationship to Mormon doctrine and its changing reputation among theologians and scholars. Finally, in exploring what Martin Marty refers to as the Book of Mormon's "revelatory appeal," Givens highlights the Book's role as the engine behind what may become the next world religion.

 

And of course anything by Brant Gardner is worth it...though one has to save up for it his masterpiece....

 

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/search.php?orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=Brant+Gardner&submit_search=Search

 

And then John Sorenson...

 

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/search.php?orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=John+Sorenson&submit_search=Search

 

You can see much of what is in Mormon's Codex by listening to the FairMormon Conference or reading the text of the presentation online here:

 

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2012-fair-conference/2012-reading-mormons-codex

 

Cursor, his son, has posted a thread listing some additional resources you might be interested in.  If you search his profile for "content" you should be able to find it quickly.

[mormonnewb]

I think that the point is that there were gold plates. And we need to remember that 3 witnesses just didn't see the plates. They also saw something else besides the plates. If a heavenly visitor showed 3 people the plates, your concern is not necessary.

 

Good point.  For some reason, that testimony about an angel of God coming down from heaven slipped my mind.  So, yes, that is EVIDENCE for the truth of the Book of Mormon.

 

I too am often swayed by the testimony of eye witnesses who refuse to recant, even under tremendous pressure to do so.  That's one of the pillars of my belief in the resurrection of Christ -- I find it implausible that eleven unrelated men (the 12 apostles less John) would willingly to go to their deaths for a lie.  So that does add something on the credibility side of the ledger for me.  Thanks!

[mfbukowski]

I'm sure I'm missing the logic here.  How is an unverifiable history book EVIDENCE of Joseph's prophetic mantle?  Because you got a confirmation based on a feeling about the truthfulness of the BOM?

 

That's fine!  That's exactly how I came to my testimony that Jesus is the Messiah.  And I think that's a perfectly valid way to arrive at a testimony about Joseph Smith.  I just don't see how the BOM adds to that testimony.

Think that one through a little.

 

The BOM is as much "evidence" of his prophetic mantle as anything he "wrote".  If he had never written" anything what would you have a testimony of?

 

I suppose one could say that they don't see how anything else, like the D&C, Pearl of Great Price, etc "adds" to their testimony either.   That would be a nice statement but totally irrelevant for others who had a testimony of the other books.

 

There are clear statements in the BOM which totally revolutionize what we thought we knew about Christianity.  If you don't find those valuable, then what IS valuable in anything Joseph "wrote"?

[halconero]

Good point.  For some reason, that testimony about an angel of God coming down from heaven slipped my mind.  So, yes, that is EVIDENCE for the truth of the Book of Mormon.

 

I too am often swayed by the testimony of eye witnesses who refuse to recant, even under tremendous pressure to do so.  That's one of the pillars of my belief in the resurrection of Christ -- I find it implausible that eleven unrelated men (the 12 apostles less John) would willingly to go to their deaths for a lie.  So that does add something on the credibility side of the ledger for me.  Thanks!

 

It's refreshing to see debate result in developing opinions. You are a scholar and a gentleman.

[mfbukowski]

OK, I can swing with that as a theory for why we led with the BOM in the past but I'm not sure it means we should continue to do so.  I think that the Internet is going to make it harder and harder to win converts in the industrialized world.

 

In fact, does anyone have any recent missionary numbers broken down by country/region?  If it weren't for those precious 8-year-olds in our stake here in AZ, we could just empty the baptismal font and save on the water bills.  In the last seven years, my ward has had THREE converted couples (the most recent was last weekend).  And while the slow baptism rate makes sense given my arrival into the flock, it doesn't explain the four years with only ONE convert before that.

That's your ward.

 

Small sample.  LA is hopping, and I think that is part of the industrialized world.

[mfbukowski]

So one must have written a book to be a true prophet? Don't tell that to Moses, Samuel, Elijah, et al.

I thought JS received the priesthood by divine ordination and not by virtue of publishing the BOM. Isn't that the real source of the restoration?

With this criteria, there could have been 14 million true prophets we don't know about because they kept it all to themselves.

 

That's probably true, but that's hardly what we are talking about here.

 

We are talking about "evidence" aren't we??  Evidence means that there is something out there in the world others can have an opinion about, either writings or deeds done others can see.

[mfbukowski]

Good point.  For some reason, that testimony about an angel of God coming down from heaven slipped my mind.  So, yes, that is EVIDENCE for the truth of the Book of Mormon.

 

I too am often swayed by the testimony of eye witnesses who refuse to recant, even under tremendous pressure to do so.  That's one of the pillars of my belief in the resurrection of Christ -- I find it implausible that eleven unrelated men (the 12 apostles less John) would willingly to go to their deaths for a lie.  So that does add something on the credibility side of the ledger for me.  Thanks!

But all those stories could have been made up later by some scribe.

 

Testimony is all anyone has.  I would never accept the Bible based on history or its own arguments. 

 

Good science fiction presents fictitious worlds which are, hopefully fully consistent, and are at least as believable as the Bible all the time.  Look at James Michener.  He did historical fiction like no one else could.

[mormonnewb]

But all those stories could have been made up later by some scribe.

 

Testimony is all anyone has.  I would never accept the Bible based on history or its own arguments. 

 

Good science fiction presents fictitious worlds which are, hopefully fully consistent, and are at least as believable as the Bible all the time.  Look at James Michener.  He did historical fiction like no one else could.

 

Agreed.  Even with all of the historical evidence that sets much of the Bible in specific times and places, there is no objective PROOF that Christ was the Messiah.  In the end, it does come down to a leap of faith.  However, there are things that can shorten the distance of that leap.  For me, researching the subject on the Internet widened that chasm, making the leap harder.

 

Of course, that was just MY experience and I am certainly, shall we say, "unique" in my thought processes.  Perhaps, there are others on the board who were also not raised in the Church, but received confirmation of the BOM from the text itself.  Bueller? Anyone?  Bueller?

[CV75]

The testimony of the witnesses is only evidence that there were gold plates. It is not evidence that JS correctly translated them. Nor is it evidence that, if correctly translated, the BOM is a true history (Gilgamesh has been translated into dozens of languages but it is still nonetheless fiction).

So think about it. For a new believer, it requires three steps of faith:

1. the plates were real

2. translation was accurate

3. author wrote an accurate history.

And I have to come to all three conclusions through the spirit. That seems a lot harder than just asking about JS.

Interesting--what steps of faith would be required to just ask about Joseph Smith, considering all that is found about him on the Internet! I suppose we all have our challenges with some aspect of the Restored Gospel or another.

 

The only step I can think of is hearing or reading his own testimony and praying about it--but then, was his experience real or actual, his understanding and explanation accurate, and his report(s) accurate? https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng

 

But no one is under the obligation to lead with the Book of Mormon if it doesn’t work for him. We need to lead with our strengths and what we have faith in. However, the Lord has admonished us to read the book and use it in our witness (D&C 84:54-57; 42:12). all in good time; no one can do everyhting at once, and our strengths do come from God and should not be treated lightly, either.

 

I suppose many of those you credit to influencing your conversion relied most heavily on their testimony of the Book or Mormon.

[CV75]

Perhaps, there are others on the board who were also not raised in the Church, but received confirmation of the BOM from the text itself.  Bueller? Anyone?  Bueller?

Me! The copy I read was left in my brother's room when he went off to college; I snooped, found it, read it. No missionaries involved. I did snoop and read a pamphlet called "Prophet Jospeh Smith's Testimony" first, and received the witness I described earlier, so I read the book with an inclination that it was true. But I only prayed about it when reading Moroni 10:3-5.