Kind Debater Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is?
BCSpace Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 All are equally the word of God in the LDS context. The words of Paul are neither above or below the words of Peter or Jesus or Nephi or Luke. If there is any part of it that is considered less reliable, it will be stated in the official doctrine (any work published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). It is true that the doctrine is that a man can get nearer to God abiding by the precepts taught in the Book of Mormon. But I don't see how that makes it more authoritative; simply that it's easier for the BoM to stand alone than the Bible. In the LDS context, one ostensibly has a testimony of Joseph Smith and his revelations which confirm the validity of the scripures. So it doesn't matter if something is literal or figurative, or words that were written hundreds or thousands of years after the event. The hand of God has preserved it, and sometimes corrected it, in it's current state. Thus ALL Christian truth hinges on whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet and the LDS Church is God's Restored Church.
JLHPROF Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is? I agree with BCSpace, although I take a much more literalistic view of the scriptures than many on the board here. There are parts of the scriptures that are clearly symbolic or figurative. But to me the determining factor of which are and which aren't have absolutely 0 to do with what historians or scientists say. For instance we know the parables are figurative. They're called parables. We know that certain elements of the Genesis account are figurative despite the actual events occurring because the prophets have revealed the symbolic parts and the temple confirms it. But if we believe that God does not lie and that the scriptures are the word of God, it's a pretty big assumption to say that Moses didn't exist and the Exodus never happened for instance or that Adam and Eve never existed and were symbolic. Especially when we have Moses appearing to the Prophet Joseph and the promise of Father Adam coming to Adam-Ondi-Ahman.Or to say that when God said he would flood the whole earth in 3 of the standard works he really only meant locally because scientists see no proof is a pretty brave assumption too. I am just not willing to call something that God said literally existed a symbol or figurative based on the ideas of scientists and historians. Sometimes God calls things parables or symbols and they are. Sometimes he gives real events. I go with God's word over our own ability to provide proof.
Ahab Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 The way to know God, our Father, is by developing a personal relationship with him, which means to communicate with him and hear from him both personally and through others he has appointed to speak and do things by his authority. But to know who he has appointed to speak and do things for him you need to check with him personally, rather than to just take someone else at their word when they say they speak for him.Ergo, you need to check with God to find out what the Bible is, and what the Book of Mormon is, and what any other writing or oral speech is, to get his input about whether or not it is his word and, if it is what he wrote or inspired others to write, to find out how to correctly understand what he meant.
Jeanne Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Does anyone feel like perhaps the Doctrine and Covenants contradicts itself? Or would that have more to do with contradicting personalities? Just curious. I loved the D and C when I was a young woman because I also loved history. Thanks,Jeanne
JLHPROF Posted September 8, 2014 Posted September 8, 2014 Does anyone feel like perhaps the Doctrine and Covenants contradicts itself? Or would that have more to do with contradicting personalities? Just curious. I loved the D and C when I was a young woman because I also loved history. Thanks,Jeanne I see no contradictions in the D&C, although some revelations were later replaced with further light and knowledge, so some revelations are very much specific to their time.
Storm Rider Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is? Hello Kind, I read all of the Standard Works of the Church. I do not distinguish between any of them: Bible, BofM, D&C, or PofGP. They are each scripture and the word of God. I probably spend more time with the Bible and BofM and I would be hard pressed to determine which one I read more. On another note, I am like many on this Board that own many different translations of the Bible and various other books that are seen as sacred or holy: the Qu'ran, Tao Te Ching, Rasa'il al-Hickma, Vedas, Bagavad Gita, Agamas, and a few others. I believe there is only one source of truth in the world - God. I accept that God loves all of his children and has taught all of them various truths; many similar and some different and instructive for all. More discernment may be needed in reading them, but there is something to learn in each of them. 1
EllenMaksoud Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is?I'm from Evangelical and Muslim stock, with a little Amish added for flavor. So, I tend to see the bible as accurate within the limitations of man's ability to accurately pass down stories that are up to 6,000 years old or more. I've seen the JS Bible and do not have major issues with it, in comparison to the KJV. One can either believe in the stock church story of how JS came up with the BOM, or that at the very least he demonstrated intimate knowlege of the Bible in doing the BOM. I do not actually care where a person is on the line between those two points. We've just had a lesson on the Book of Job and part of the tiresome discussion was about whether it was metaphorical or true. For sake of simplicity I just assume the Bible is true, however lurid parts of it may seem. The BOM gets a bit traumatic feeling for me because of the constant killing, even more than in the Bible. I've experienced enough violence directly, the I find too much exposure to violence to be re-traumatising. So, I don't care to get into long discussions about the usefulness and the truth of either the Bible or the BOM. For me, it is a given.
CV75 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is?Because our minds possess intellect, emotion and spirit, I believe God reveals Himself to us in more ways than merely text. For example, the Light of Christ, the power of the Holy Ghost, the testimonies of nature. Thus, scripture is the "will of the Lord,...mind of the Lord, ...word of the Lord, ...voice of the Lord, and the power of God" (D&C 68:4) in any of the forms in which it presented. So if anyone wants to focus only on text, he may be missing out on the full picture and the richness of God's expression of His love to His children. We often hear that it is far better to know God than it is to merely know about Him. That said, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16).
DJBrown Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is? Handbook 2 section 21.1.7 reads: "The most reliable way to measure the accuracy of any biblical translation is not by comparing different texts, but by comparison with the Book of Mormon and modern-day revelations." To me, this is a significant statement and one that has implications for the answer to your question. The Book of Mormon is the standard. It is to be given the greatest weight when considering any teaching or book.
Antoni Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I also consider the apocrypha as canon - see D&C 91. I think all the standard works are useful in them being particular people's understanding and experiences of God. Also there are clearly parts where is God speaking. i love how the scriptures speak to me today and am always amazed at how pertinent parts I'm reading are to my life (shouldn't be surprised I suppose!) the BoM is special to me, it's the keystone of our religion, but a keystone on it's own is little use it needs the other sections to make a whole. For me the knowledge that I'll be studying and pondering these tomes and always finding something fresh is exhilarating.
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 This is another tangent, this time from the "Why are we still trying to make God in our image?" thread. Personally, I think that the way to know God is to rely on what he has revealed about himself in the Bible, but obviously not everyone here shares that view. So I'm curious: how do you regard the Bible, the BOM and other LDS scriptures? What parts, if any, do you think are reliable sources of information about God? If you think only parts of the scriptures are reliable, how do you determine what's reliable and what isn't? If you think they were all or mostly man-made and not inspired, how do you determine who God is? What makes the Bible or any Scripture the word of God?
Avatar4321 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 They are both true. And as Paul said all scripture is profitable for our enlightenment.
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 They are both true. And as Paul said all scripture is profitable for our enlightenment. What makes them true?
EllenMaksoud Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 What makes them true?I just hope that what I read will make me a better person. The truthfulness of the books is not at issue for me. I actually don't like some scripture. I get angry when I read where Paul says that women must be silent in church. And Surah 4:34 in the Quran, really ruffles my feathers. I openly growl when I read Jacob 2. Yet, it is clear that I am not to argue with the Holy Spirit.
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I just hope that what I read will make me a better person. The truthfulness of the books is not at issue for me. I actually don't like some scripture. I get angry when I read where Paul says that women must be silent in church. And Surah 4:34 in the Quran, really ruffles my feathers. I openly growl when I read Jacob 2. Yet, it is clear that I am not to argue with the Holy Spirit. I think you're nearly there. We believe these are the words of God be cause of that still small voice is telling us(individually) that they are.
The Nehor Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) I judge everything based on whether it agrees with the Book of Tobit. Edited September 9, 2014 by The Nehor 1
EllenMaksoud Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I think you're nearly there. We believe these are the words of God be cause of that still small voice is telling us(individually) that they are.Thanks. There are just lots of people running around with "High Need For Authority" and "High need for Order". The more I ignore them, the better it is. We must remember that the Work is much more important than the opinions of others. even those who believe they have authority.
Avatar4321 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 What makes them true? The fact that the testimonies of the atonement found in both are true. They depict things as they were, as they are, and as they will be.
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 The fact that the testimonies of the atonement found in both are true. They depict things as they were, as they are, and as they will be. What makes those testimonies true? Even assuming the writers of the Bible were witnesses, not one is concurrent with the actual events, but long after.
Ahab Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I judge everything based on whether it agrees with the Book of Tobit.That's extra-Tobital. The Book of Tobit doesn't say you have to do that, so why do you do it? 1
JLHPROF Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 The fact that the testimonies of the atonement found in both are true. They depict things as they were, as they are, and as they will be. I am terrible at philosophy but even to me this seems like circular reasoning... The bible is true because the things it says are true and the things the bible says are true because the bible says them...doesn't make anything true.
Avatar4321 Posted September 10, 2014 Posted September 10, 2014 I am terrible at philosophy but even to me this seems like circular reasoning... The bible is true because the things it says are true and the things the bible says are true because the bible says them...doesn't make anything true. The Spirit teaches they are true. If you don't agree, that's fine but it doesn't make them any else true.
Buzzard Posted September 10, 2014 Posted September 10, 2014 I think that the major events in the Bible all took place, but especially the older events, we may be missing some context. For example, there really was a man named Adam and his wife was Eve, and they were kicked out of the Garden. But the fossil record would seem to indicate that there were other men, or at least hominids on the earth at the same time. Were these beings the future mates of Adam and Eve's offspring? Evolutionary precursors who then died out? Who knows? So while I am a definite backer of biblical historicity, with innerancy, not so much. Job really happened, but his friends signing songs to him? Might be a bit embellished, and that's OK. BOM is less embellished, more historical, but even there, we don't know the whole backstory. But due to it's origin, the bar is lower. By identifying Lehi's route from Jerusalem to where they launched in modern day Oman, and finding all the Hebraic poetic and style examples, with a few Egyptian names thrown in for good measure in the BOM, we don't need a sign saying "Zarahemla 10 miles->".
Recommended Posts