Book Of Mormon Historicity: Does It Matter?

[mfbukowski]

that's all?

No need to believe in the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith?

Heck no.

 

You've been hanging out here all these years and you don't know that?  You need the ordinances to reach exaltation- but you can even get those after you die and realize their validity. 

[mfbukowski]

If we are talking about what ultimately needs to be done to be saved, that is one thing.  If we are talking about this life only, then I would submit that you only have to be true to the light and knowledge that you have.  Follow the good in your heart.  You will be led into the paths of salvation whether in this life or the next, be you a Buddhist, Muslim, Protestant, Catholic, atheist, or Mormon, etc.

Also here we have a different definition for "salvation" than he does.

 

For him "salvation" only means NOT going to a burning hell.  We don't even believe in a burning hell, and for many of us, salvation means "exaltation".

[Gervin]

So you have no faith in the Bible as the Word of God (at least parts of it)?

Tell you what, I'll post a verse about faith in God and Christ and you post a verse about faith in the Bible and we'll see who has the most verses when we're done.  I'll go first:

1 Peter 1:21:  Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

 

 

I just read a talk on lds.org that states with any testimony of the Book of Mormon will come a testimony of Christ, it is impossible not to have a witness of Christ at the same time. One cannot divide Christ out of the Book of Mormon.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2001/04/to-bear-testimony-of-mine-only-begotten?lang=eng

"This is the promise, that our Eternal Father will give us a manifestation of truth—a personal revelation of eternal consequence.

 

 

I reject Nephi's promise on logic alone: if a book tells you the method for determining the book is true and you exercise that method then you've already determined the book is true.  An answer to the affirmative may lead you to believe that the method was correct, but as people have noted for decades, what if you get a testimony that the book is false?  The answer, of course, is not in the self-actualizing method, it's in the person applying the method.  No thanks.

 

actually, the JW's make the point better than me:

http://www.watchman.org/articles/mormonism/testing-the-book-of-mormon-by-moroni-104/

 

The Book of Mormon was given to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, manifesting Himself unto all nations.

 

I've never heard of a Jew believing one scintilla of the Jewish history contained in the Book of Mormon.  How could this not be considered a complete fail?

 

You will find that when Moroni’s promise is fulfilled and you are given the knowledge that the Book of Mormon is truly the word of God, there will come with it a witness that Jesus is the Christ, the Redeemer and Savior of the world. I have never known an instance where this did not occur.

 

 

And now you can say you know of an instance when it didn't occur: theolderthebolder.org/downloads/tracts.viewable/mormonism/moronichallenge.html

Edited December 9, 2014 by Gervin

[mfbukowski]

I'm not required to have faith in the Bible.  With re to the Bible, we can talk about how I perceive spiritual truths and/or how I embrace it as the testimony about Christ and the Gospel ,but such a conversation would include the working of the Holy Spirit.  I'm not required to pray about the Bible to ascertain or verify that I should have faith in its truthfulness.

How could we know anything about Jesus without the bible??

 

How could you have faith in Him if you never read the bible??

[Gervin]

Also here we have a different definition for "salvation" than he does.

 

For him "salvation" only means NOT going to a burning hell.  We don't even believe in a burning hell, and for many of us, salvation means "exaltation".

Speak for yourself, please.

[Gervin]

How could we know anything about Jesus without the bible??

 

How could you have faith in Him if you never read the bible??

Tell me where I'm instructed to have faith in the Bible?  In the Bible?  What verse(s)?

[mfbukowski]

Tell me where I'm instructed to have faith in the Bible?  In the Bible?  What verse(s)?

I am sorry I can't take this and remain charitable.  I suppose you do not have faith in Jesus as the savior?  How could you know Jesus was the savior without having faith in the bible?  The only way we know that Jesus even allegedly existed is from the bible.

 

Nevermind.  You don't have to answer.  We are getting nowhere.  If you cannot see that point, there is not much to discuss.

[ERayR]

I've never heard of a Jew believing one scintilla of the Jewish history contained in the Book of Mormon.  How could this not be considered a complete fail?

 

And now say you know of an instance when it didn't occur: theolderthebolder.org/downloads/tracts.viewable/mormonism/moronichallenge.html

 

Your circle of friends of Jewish decent must be limited.  I know of at least two who believe.

 

There is a caveat you know and only you know if you have honestly met that hurdle.

[Gervin]

I am sorry I can't take this and remain charitable.  I suppose you do not have faith in Jesus as the savior?  How could you know Jesus was the savior without having faith in the bible?  The only way we know that Jesus even allegedly existed is from the bible.

 

Nevermind.  You don't have to answer.  We are getting nowhere.  If you cannot see that point, there is not much to discuss.

I knew before I asked that you wouldn't have an answer because no where are Christian's required to pray for or exhibit faith in the Bible.  Because faith in the Book of Mormon is a litmus test for entry into the LDS Church, Mormons assume it must be true for those who have a Bible-based belief.  As you admit, it isn't so.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Gervin

[mfbukowski]

I knew before I asked that you wouldn't have an answer because no where are Christian's required to pray for or exhibit faith in the Bible.  Because faith in the Book of Mormon is a litmus test for entry into the LDS Church, Mormons assume it must be true for those who have a Bible-based belief.  As you admit, it isn't so.

You didn't even understand the post.  Of course Christians are required to believe in Christ or they would not be Christians.

[Gervin]

You didn't even understand the post.  Of course Christians are required to believe in Christ or they would not be Christians.

Read slower for better comprehension; the subject is faith in the Bible, not Christ.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Gervin

[mfbukowski]

Read slower for better comprehension; the subject is faith in the Bible, not Christ.

 

And where do we learn about Jesus?  National Geographic?  One cannot believe in "Jesus" if the only source we have for his existence and sacrifice is the Bible.  ONE MUST BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BELIEVE IN JESUS.

Edited December 9, 2014 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

 Because faith in the Book of Mormon is a litmus test for entry into the LDS Church, Mormons assume it must be true for those who have a Bible-based belief.

You have a Bible based belief system, but you don't have to believe in the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

I see.  Very interesting.

[Freedom]

I think your interest in Mesoamerica is admirable but, unfortunately, I'm not an expert on the topic. If this is a back-handed way of claiming a Hebrew culture in this geography during this time period, the world awaits your astonishing news.

I think your lack of knowledge of Mesoamerica makes your criticism of the Book of Mormon rather ridiculous. Stop pretending to be qualified to find fault with the Book of Mormon history if all you can do is fabricate your argument. 

[Freedom]

 

There are a number of such instances which come immediately to mind, though they may not all fit within your narrow spectrum of Gospel principles:

 

John W. Welch (Prof. at BYU Law School) has written a book in which he describes the legal cases in the Book of Mormon based on his expertise on ancient Near Eastern law (he regularly presents papers on the subject in non-Mormon ancient legal forums).  In each instance he is able to clarify what is actually going on and why -- something which escapes most of us.  See Welch, The Legal Cases in the Book of Mormon (BYU Press/Maxwell Institute, 2008).  See review at https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V42N03_191.pdf .

 

In both the Bible and Book of Mormon, analysts have found examples of formal ancient Near Eastern covenantal structures.  One fine article on this can be found in Stephen D. Ricks, "Kingship, Coronation, and Covenant in Mosiah 1-6," in J. Welch & S. Ricks, eds., King Benjamin's Speech (Provo: FARMS, 1998), 233-275.

 

In both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are also found numerous instances of temple rites of the kind which Mormons understand embody the formal endowment rites of passage.  Much of this remains unpublished for the Book of Mormon, due to obvious problems with the sacred nature of those rites (See, for example, J. Spencer, An Other Testament, 42-63, with strong Israelite temple motifs; K. Christensen, “The Temple, the Monarchy, and Wisdom,” cited in Lindsay, “Temple Blindness,” online at http://blog.fairmormon.org/2014/05/15/temple-blindness/).  However, the biblical material has been widely published.  On Gen 1 - 3, and other biblical temple texts, see 

 

John Kselman JBL 97:164 n.15; Shea Origins 5:9-38; B. Porten HUCA 38:95; N. Habel Literary Crit., 69-70; S. McEvenue Narrative 49-50,81,114; K. Westerman Genesis Accounts 14ff.; Kempf JTTL 7/4:33-53; Francis Landy, “The Song of Songs in the Garden of Eden,” JBL, 98 (Dec 1979):513-528, re Songs 6:2-11; R. Hendel, “Tangled Plots in Genesis,” in A. Beck, et al., eds., Fortunate the Eyes That See: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman (Eerdmans, 1995), 40, citing for further detail H. C. White, Narration and Discourse in the Book of Genesis (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991), 130-135; cf. R. Hendel, “Getting Back to the Garden of Eden,” Bible Review, 14/6 (Dec 1998):17,47; Medina cites E. Vogelzang and W. J. van Bekkum, “Meaning and Symbolism of Clothing in Ancient Near Eastern Texts,” in H. Vanstiphout, et al., eds., Scripta Signa Vocis (Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1986), 267,273; D. Bokovoy, Athoring the OT, I:42-45, citing Mark Smith, The Priestly Vision of Genesis I, 76-77; Hayim ben Yosef Tawil, Akkadian Lexical Companion for Biblical Hebrew (KTAV, 2009), 285-286, discusses the “setting” of the Song of Songs as “the royal couple in their natural environment in the garden.  Consequently, in light of both Akk. epigraphical and iconographical sources, perhaps [ʻereś] in SoS 1:16 might be the etymological and the semantic equivalent of Akk. qirsu” or qersu, meaning “a sacred area; arbor, bower”; G. Lloyd Carr, “Is the Song of Songs a ‘Sacred Marriage’ Drama?” JETS, 2 (June 1979):103-114; cf. S. N. Kramer, The Sacred Marriage Rite: Aspects of Faith, Myth, and Ritual in Ancient Sumer (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1969), 99; Michael Golder, Isaiah as Liturgy (Ashgate Publ., 2004); E. F. Campbell, Ruth, AB 7 (Doubleday, 1975), 118-119; Clifford, CBQ, 39:574.

As to polygamy, the corrected manuscript readings of Jacob (2:22-30,34, 3:5) make it clear that polygamy can only be practiced at the suffrance of God, not based on our own value judgments, where some had mistakenly thought that it was always prohibited by God.

 

Your examples only serve that the book is very old, None of this research gives us a better understanding of what is meant by faith, repentance, service, or any of the admonitions of Paul. We can do away with all this scholarship and still have a complete understanding of the gospel message. 

[Gervin]

You have a Bible based belief system, but you don't have to believe in the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

I see.  Very interesting.

Believing that the Bible is the word of God and having faith in the Word of God is a distinction, among others, that you're unable to grasp. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Tell you what, I'll post a verse about faith in God and Christ and you post a verse about faith in the Bible and we'll see who has the most verses when we're done.  I'll go first:

1 Peter 1:21:  Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

 

Jesus Himself said: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39

Isaiah admonished us: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."  Isa 8:20

You appear to want to soft pedal Holy Scripture, but see Jeremiah 44:23, Ezekiel 37:15-20 (1 Nephi 3:12), Matthew 22:29, Mark 12:24, Luke 24:27,32,45, John 5:39, Acts 17:2,11, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21, etc. How important is Scripture?  It is the foundation stone of the Protestant Reformation:

David T. King and William Webster, Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, Volume I: A Biblical Defense of the Reformation Principle of Sola Scriptura (Christian Resources, 2001).  Accompanied by this blurb and quotations:

 

“The principle of sola Scriptura---that the Bible is sufficient for all belief and the ultimate authority for the church---was the guiding principle of the Reformation. Webster and King affirm and defend this foundational tenet biblically, historically, and patristically against the suspect canonical arguments and ‘cut and paste’ patrology of modern Roman Catholic apologists.”

 

From within the book:

"Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith for the Church" (from the forward by James White);

 

"Scripture alone is the only certain, infallible norm by which all theology, doctrine, creeds (beliefs), practice and morality of the Christian Church is to be regulated, in accordance with that which is 'either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture'..." (vol 1, p. 129);

 

"...[the Scriptures are] the only special revelation that has been preserved, and as such, are sufficient to communicate clearly all truths necessary for man's salvation and conduct of life..." (ibid);

 

"...the inscripturated Word of God is the final bar of judgment before which all theological and ecclesiastical controversies are to be adjudicated..." (ibid), etc.

 

This book was a reply to Robert Sungenis, Not By Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Queenship, 1997).

 

I reject Nephi's promise on logic alone: if a book tells you the method for determining the book is true and you exercise that method then you've already determined the book is true.  An answer to the affirmative may lead you to believe that the method was correct, but as people have noted for decades, what if you get a testimony that the book is false?  The answer, of course, is not in the self-actualizing method, it's in the person applying the method.  No thanks.

.........................................................

You are probably referring to Moroni's promise, but you might just as well have referred to James 1:5-8, which sets up the same set of conditions, which you apparently reject, but which young Joseph Smith found a key way to discover truth.

 

I've never heard of a Jew believing one scintilla of the Jewish history contained in the Book of Mormon.  How could this not be considered a complete fail?

You may never have heard of such, but then you actually know very little about the LDS faith or history.  There have been some very well educated Jews who have converted to the LDS faith, notably Alexander Neibaur (advisor to Joseph Smith in Nauvoo), who was the great-grandfather of Hugh Nibley.  There was also Hirsch Miller, who translated the Book of Mormon into biblical Hebrew in 1927 -- using beautiful Tora-script.  And there are others now living, one of  whom appears on this board from time to time, and is among the greatest intellects within the LDS Church.

 

And now you can say you know of an instance when it didn't occur: theolderthebolder.org/downloads/tracts.viewable/mormonism/moronichallenge.html

Calmoriah was referring to the twin testimony of the Book of Mormon and Jesus Christ (they go together when one applies Moroni's promise), not to whether somebody claimed to have failed to get an answer.  One could as easily apply James 1:5-8 to any such question.  Whether you get an answer is really up to you.  The Holy Spirit asks only for sincerety.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Gervin]

Jesus Himself said: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39

Isaiah admonished us: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."  Isa 8:20

You appear to want to soft pedal Holy Scripture, but see Jeremiah 44:23, Ezekiel 37:15-20 (1 Nephi 3:12), Matthew 22:29, Mark 12:24, Luke 24:27,32,45, John 5:39, Acts 17:2,11, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21, etc. How important is Scripture?  It is the foundation stone of the Protestant Reformation:

David T. King and William Webster, Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, Volume I: A Biblical Defense of the Reformation Principle of Sola Scriptura (Christian Resources, 2001).  Accompanied by this blurb and quotations:

 

“The principle of sola Scriptura---that the Bible is sufficient for all belief and the ultimate authority for the church---was the guiding principle of the Reformation. Webster and King affirm and defend this foundational tenet biblically, historically, and patristically against the suspect canonical arguments and ‘cut and paste’ patrology of modern Roman Catholic apologists.”

 

From within the book:

"Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith for the Church" (from the forward by James White);

 

"Scripture alone is the only certain, infallible norm by which all theology, doctrine, creeds (beliefs), practice and morality of the Christian Church is to be regulated, in accordance with that which is 'either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture'..." (vol 1, p. 129);

 

"...[the Scriptures are] the only special revelation that has been preserved, and as such, are sufficient to communicate clearly all truths necessary for man's salvation and conduct of life..." (ibid);

 

"...the inscripturated Word of God is the final bar of judgment before which all theological and ecclesiastical controversies are to be adjudicated..." (ibid), etc.

 

This book was a reply to Robert Sungenis, Not By Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Queenship, 1997).

 

You are probably referring to Moroni's promise, but you might just as well have referred to James 1:5-8, which sets up the same set of conditions, which you apparently reject, but which young Joseph Smith found a key way to discover truth.

 

 

Calmoriah was referring to the twin testimony of the Book of Mormon and Jesus Christ (they go together when one applies Moroni's promise), not to whether somebody claimed to have failed to get an answer.  One could as easily apply James 1:5-8 to any such question.  Whether you get an answer is really up to you.  The Holy Spirit asks only for sincerety.

from another web site (my emphasis):

 

if you base your belief in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord on the truth status of the Bible rather than the other way around (basing its truth on its power to transform through relationship with Jesus Christ), you are risking idolatry. Jesus is the “Sache” of Scripture. Luther knew it as did Calvin. But fundamentalists and neo-fundamentalists put Scripture over Jesus when they try to make belief in him as Savior and Lord dependent on the inerrancy of the Bible. The Bible, then, becomes the gift in place of Jesus Christ. It should be (and is) the other way around—Jesus is the gift. The Bible is simply the Christmas-wrapped box that delivers him to us. I believe in the Bible’s truth and authority because of Him. But that in no way requires belief in absolute, technical, detailed accuracy of every statement of Scripture.

 

The James passage is written to the brethren - to those who were already believers.  Using this as support to pray for truth does not jibe with the actual words in the text.  Also, James is instructing about wisdom, not truth - a distinction that seems to be missed on those who want to use this verse to justify praying for truth.

 

You may never have heard of such, but then you actually know very little about the LDS faith or history.  There have been some very well educated Jews who have converted to the LDS faith, notably Alexander Neibaur (advisor to Joseph Smith in Nauvoo), who was the great-grandfather of Hugh Nibley.  There was also Hirsch Miller, who translated the Book of Mormon into biblical Hebrew in 1927 -- using beautiful Tora-script.  And there are others now living, one of  whom appears on this board from time to time, and is among the greatest intellects within the LDS Church.

 

So, you would say that as an instrument for converting the Jews, the Book of Mormon is a success?

Edited December 9, 2014 by Gervin

[pogi]

Believing that the Bible is the word of God and having faith in the Word of God is a distinction, among others, that you're unable to grasp. 

 

Can you define faith from your perspective so that we can better understand where you are coming from?

 

Second, why do you distinguish between God and His word? God's word is a manifestation of Him. To have faith in the word of God is to have faith in God.  You cannot separate the two.

Edited December 9, 2014 by pogi

[Gervin]

Can you define faith from your perspective so that we can better understand where you are coming from?

 

Second, why do you distinguish between God and His word? God's word is a manifestation of Him. To have faith in the word of God is to have faith in God.  You cannot separate the two.

see above

[pogi]

see above

 

I don't disagree with that statement, but you still cannot distinguish between God and His word.  If the Bible does indeed contain the word of God, it is up to us to find it through the spirit and have faith in it. God will manifest His word unto us through the spirit.  To acknowledge that spirit and believe and act on His word is faith indeed. 

 

Again, what is faith?  That was not answered above.

[Gervin]

I don't disagree with that statement, but you still cannot distinguish between God and His word.  

Then every reference in the Bible to faith in God and Christ really means faith in God and the Christ and the Bible?  I don't buy it and would again ask, as I did in post 178, to show me where in the Bible that this is so. 

 

If you want my definition of faith I would simply throw scripture at you ... but I think you can find those verses easily enough.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Gervin

[stemelbow]

Then every reference in the Bible to faith in God and Christ really means faith in God and the Christ and the Bible?  I don't buy it and would again ask, as I did in post 178, to show me where in the Bible that this is so. 

 

If you want my definition of faith I would simply throw scripture at you ... but I think you can find those verses easily enough.

I hate to butt in, but I have been reading along. It seems obvious there is plenty of attempts to talk past each other here. I think this can easily be remedied if you answer whether you trust in the message of the Bible?

If so, then I think the talking past each other will be more obvious.

[Gervin]

I hate to butt in, but I have been reading along. It seems obvious there is plenty of attempts to talk past each other here. I think this can easily be remedied if you answer whether you trust in the message of the Bible?

If so, then I think the talking past each other will be more obvious.

I think it's a valid question. Yes, I trust the message of the Bible.

[stemelbow]

I think it's a valid question. Yes, I trust the message of the Bible.

Cool. you simply don't like the idea of applying the word "faith" to that trust you have in the Bible, it seems.