Testing the Book of Mormon by Prayer

[Trout]

In a recent discussion I was in with an LDS friend of mine, I was issued a challenge, the challenge involved a verse from the Book of Mormon (Moroni 10:4) which goes like this;

"And when ye shall receive these things (the Book of Mormon), I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."

In essence my friend was telling me to ask God whether or not the Book of Mormon was indeed what it claimed to be, by using a claim that the book itself makes.

But for me to use the Book of Mormon promise, that would mean that I already trusted the book enough to believe that the promise in it was true. Sound good? I don't think so either.

Before the promise can be applied, it must be tested. And the Book of Mormon and the other LDS scriptures must be excluded from the test.

One option would be to use the Bible to test the test. (1Th 5:21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.) And to my recollection, nowhere in the Bible are we told to pray to find out if the words contained in the Bible are true. (Don't even try to mis-apply James 1:5)

Another thing that troubles me with the Book of Mormon promise is the fact that it questions my sincerity and intent, "if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent,". In other words, if you don't receive the answer that the Book of Mormon is indeed the Word of God then you either weren't sincere enough or you had wrong intentions. So it would seem that there is only one correct answer from the get go.

So when I talk with my friend again, I'm going to tell him that I must decline his invitation to pray about the Book of Mormon.

Because the Book of Mormon is either true or it's false completely apart from what answer I may receive in prayer.

[Xmansmommy]

trout, I'm sure there will be many things your LDS friends will ask you to pray about. They will also expect you to get a "burning in the bosom" that will be the Holy Spirit "confirming" the truthfulness of whatever you are praying about. Compare everything with scripture and use the scriptures as your guide for truth. The HS does guide us into all truth but it won't contradict the scriptures as the BOM and LDS doctrine does. Just my thoughts, for what they're worth. :shrug:

[Xavier]

They will also expect you to get a "burning in the bosom" that will be the Holy Spirit "confirming" the truthfulness of whatever you are praying about.
Ironic... John Wesley (of Methodism fame) also experienced a "heart-warming". Of course, his was more of a call to ministry rather than a verification of truth. It just struck me funny.

Yours,
Xavier

[Trout]

trout, I'm sure there will be many things your LDS friends will ask you to pray about. They will also expect you to get a "burning in the bosom" that will be the Holy Spirit "confirming" the truthfulness of whatever you are praying about. Compare everything with scripture and use the scriptures as your guide for truth. The HS does guide us into all truth but it won't contradict the scriptures as the BOM and LDS doctrine does. Just my thoughts, for what they're worth. :shrug

I get a "burning in the bosom" when I've had too much coffee.
:lol:

[Xmansmommy]

:lol: trout! You'll have to repent from that coffee drinkin young man! :whip:

[Xmansmommy]

Ironic... John Wesley (of Methodism fame) also experienced a "heart-warming". Of course, his was more of a call to ministry rather than a verification of truth. It just struck me funny.

Yours,
Xavier

:xavier:, they also say you'll hear a still small voice that will confirm truth to you too. :nsm: Boy I could tell you some stuff that I experienced that I thought was the HS confirming truth to me when I was investigating the LDS church. :ahem:

[Xavier]

:lol:

[Jin-Roh]

It kind of makes Mormonism unfalsifible doesn't it?

[John Powell]

POWELL:
I've avoided this forum for a while, but maybe now is a good time to return. I'll let my former believing self respond.

In a recent discussion I was in with an LDS friend of mine, I was issued a challenge, the challenge involved a verse from the Book of Mormon (Moroni 10:4) which goes like this;

"And when ye shall receive these things (the Book of Mormon), I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."

In essence my friend was telling me to ask God whether or not the Book of Mormon was indeed what it claimed to be, by using a claim that the book itself makes.

But for me to use the Book of Mormon promise, that would mean that I already trusted the book enough to believe that the promise in it was true. Sound good? I don't think so either.


JOHN MORMON:
Don't you believe that God is willing and able to reveal the truth of the Book of Mormon to you?


Before the promise can be applied, it must be tested. And the Book of Mormon and the other LDS scriptures must be excluded from the test.


JOHN MORMON:
To do the test, you should read a significant portion of the Book of Mormon with an open, humble mind. You should really want to know whether it's true, not have decided already that it can't be. You should reflect on the teachings contained. You should then pray to God to ask if the Book of Mormon is true. If God confirms the truth to you then there's your answer. It's then up to you whether you'll be obedient to your revelation.


One option would be to use the Bible to test the test. (1Th 5:21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.) And to my recollection, nowhere in the Bible are we told to pray to find out if the words contained in the Bible are true. (Don't even try to mis-apply James 1:5)


JOHN MORMON:
You don't seem to have a very good understanding of the Bible, Troutk13. How do you think anyone in the Bible came to a knowledge of the truth? Didn't they PRAY to God or at least be in a prayerful, obedient frame of mind and then God revealed the truth to them?


Another thing that troubles me with the Book of Mormon promise is the fact that it questions my sincerity and intent, "if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent,". In other words, if you don't receive the answer that the Book of Mormon is indeed the Word of God then you either weren't sincere enough or you had wrong intentions. So it would seem that there is only one correct answer from the get go.


JOHN MORMON:
The only correct answer is what is true. You should do the test.


So when I talk with my friend again, I'm going to tell him that I must decline his invitation to pray about the Book of Mormon.


JOHN MORMON:
Scared that the answer from God about the Book of Mormon might be "TRUE," huh? How would it hurt to make a sincere effort to test Moroni's promise, Troutk13? You seem biased against the answer God wants to give you. You're sort of like Paul and Alma the younger and the sons of Mosiah. Maybe God is willing to give you a strong enough answer to overcome your bias, but maybe not.


Because the Book of Mormon is either true or it's false completely apart from what answer I may receive in prayer.


JOHN MORMON:
If God confirms to you the truth of the Book of Mormon then you can be assured that it is true.

3 Ne. 14: 7-8 (cf. Matt 7:7-8; Luke 11:9-10)
7 Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

8 For every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened.

JOHN MORMON:
Why do you believe the Bible is true, Troutk13? Did you ask God and He revealed it to you or did you merely accept it as true without any personal confirmation from God or what?

John Powell

[John Powell]

trout, I'm sure there will be many things your LDS friends will ask you to pray about. They will also expect you to get a "burning in the bosom" that will be the Holy Spirit "confirming" the truthfulness of whatever you are praying about. Compare everything with scripture and use the scriptures as your guide for truth. The HS does guide us into all truth but it won't contradict the scriptures as the BOM and LDS doctrine does. Just my thoughts, for what they're worth. :shrug:

JOHN MORMON:
The Book of Mormon is scripture, so you should use that too.

If you deny this then you would seem to be committing the fallacy of special pleading because to the N.T. writers "scripture" was what was written in the O.T., not necessarily what they themselves were writing. You would seem to be claiming that God is unable or unwilling to give more scriptures beyond the last book of the N.T. The Jews could similarly argue with Christians that Christians should compare everything with scripture (meaning the O.T.) and use the scriptures (meaning the O.T.) as your guide for truth.

Your INTERPRETATION of the Book of Mormon might contradict your INTERPRETATION of the Bible. Fallible scripture writers or copyists might screw up, but God's Word does not contradict. The true interpretation of the Book of Mormon cannot contradict the true interpretation of the Bible.

What specific passages of the Book of Mormon and the Bible do you claim contradict?

John Powell
A former believer in Mormonism,
Now an athe-ist a strong atheist.

[John Powell]

Ironic... John Wesley (of Methodism fame) also experienced a "heart-warming". Of course, his was more of a call to ministry rather than a verification of truth. It just struck me funny.

Yours,
Xavier

JOHN MORMON:
That would not seem to me to be ironic. Presumably God was confirming to Wesley that he had an important mission to perform. The full restoration of the Gospel was not really possible until reformists like Calvin, Wesley and Luther, and others had laid done some important groundwork. Notice, that people like Calvin, Wesley, and Luther did NOT claim that they were God's prophet of the restoration or that they received from God the keys to the restoration. Those were some things for Joseph Smith to do.

John Powell

[John Powell]

Xavier:

Ironic... John Wesley (of Methodism fame) also experienced a "heart-warming". Of course, his was more of a call to ministry rather than a verification of truth. It just struck me funny.

Yours,
Xavier

Xmansmommy:
:xavier:, they also say you'll hear a still small voice that will confirm truth to you too. :nsm: Boy I could tell you some stuff that I experienced that I thought was the HS confirming truth to me when I was investigating the LDS church. :ahem:


JOHN MORMON:
You've heard of the "still small voice" (1 Kings 19:12) no? That's an alternative way to the "burning in the bosom." Some people get a burning in the bosom. Others get a still small voice. Others get confirmation in some other way. Not everyone is the same.

John Powell

[John Powell]

It kind of makes Mormonism unfalsifible doesn't it?

POWELL (the atheist):
Sort of. It makes it confirmable to you if you really really want it to be confirmed to you. If your mind pressures your brain hard enough long enough to "give you a sign" then it just might do that to make you happy. Similar self deception may have played a role in the conversion stories of many Christians.

John Powell

[Trout]

POWELL:
I've avoided this forum for a while, but maybe now is a good time to return. I'll let my former believing self respond.



JOHN MORMON:
Don't you believe that God is willing and able to reveal the truth of the Book of Mormon to you?



JOHN MORMON:
To do the test, you should read a significant portion of the Book of Mormon with an open, humble mind. You should really want to know whether it's true, not have decided already that it can't be. You should reflect on the teachings contained. You should then pray to God to ask if the Book of Mormon is true. If God confirms the truth to you then there's your answer. It's then up to you whether you'll be obedient to your revelation.



JOHN MORMON:
You don't seem to have a very good understanding of the Bible, Troutk13. How do you think anyone in the Bible came to a knowledge of the truth? Didn't they PRAY to God or at least be in a prayerful, obedient frame of mind and then God revealed the truth to them?



JOHN MORMON:
The only correct answer is what is true. You should do the test.



JOHN MORMON:
Scared that the answer from God about the Book of Mormon might be "TRUE," huh? How would it hurt to make a sincere effort to test Moroni's promise, Troutk13? You seem biased against the answer God wants to give you. You're sort of like Paul and Alma the younger and the sons of Mosiah. Maybe God is willing to give you a strong enough answer to overcome your bias, but maybe not.



JOHN MORMON:
If God confirms to you the truth of the Book of Mormon then you can be assured that it is true.

3 Ne. 14: 7-8 (cf. Matt 7:7-8; Luke 11:9-10)
7 Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

8 For every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened.

JOHN MORMON:
Why do you believe the Bible is true, Troutk13? Did you ask God and He revealed it to you or did you merely accept it as true without any personal confirmation from God or what?

John Powell
Nice to meet you John Mormon (JM with your permission?)

It's interesting as I read your response to my initial statement that you have changed the direction from which we started. Let me make a couple of assumptions before we get going.

First: I assume that you would agree that the truthfulness of the BOM doesn't hinge on whether I believe it to be true or not.

Second: The same goes for the bible.

Both books are true or they are false completely apart from how I feel about either of them. So why would my

Since the bible antedates the BOM, and the LDS church claims that they are both the word of God, then the BOM should be in complete harmony with the bible. So that would be one way by which we could guage the truthfulness of the BOM, whether we believed the bible to be true or not. I am quite sure that you are very good at harmonizing the two, and I am equally sure that we wouldn't be in agreement with each other's varying interpretation of either book. So at this point we should stay away from such an undertaking.

The more important question remains, is the BOM the Word of God? And isn't there a way to determine that apart from how either of us feel about it? I think that we would be in agreement when I say that there are many people, while very sincere, that are sincerely wrong.

So apart from your feelings and personal testimony, why should I believe the BOM to be what it claims to be?

troutk13

PS. John Powell (JP with your permission?) when you say that your are a strong atheist, are you claiming the absolute negative position, that in fact God does not exist?

[John Powell]

Nice to meet you John Mormon (JM with your permission?)


POWELL:
"JM" is fine. Just be sure to distinguish properly between your responses to this pseudo believer JM and the real atheist that I am.


It's interesting as I read your response to my initial statement that you have changed the direction from which we started. Let me make a couple of assumptions before we get going.


JOHN MORMON:
Argument by assertion. In what way did I "change the direction"? What was the original direction and what was the new direction?


First: I assume that you would agree that the truthfulness of the BOM doesn't hinge on whether I believe it to be true or not.


JOHN MORMON:
Agreed.


Second: The same goes for the bible.


JOHN MORMON:
That would be necessary to avoid a charge of special pleading.


Both books are true or they are false completely apart from how I feel about either of them. So why would my


JOHN MORMON:
You didn't seem to finish your thought.


Since the bible antedates the BOM, and the LDS church claims that they are both the word of God, then the BOM should be in complete harmony with the bible.


JOHN MORMON:
Given that the Book of Mormon includes the Book of Ether which relates events from the tower of Babel, long before Moses, apparently parts of the Book of Mormon are older than the book of Genesis (presumably written by Moses). Nevertheless, your point is good. A correct interpretation of the BOM should be in complete harmony with a correct interpretation of the Bible. Don't forget that the writers and copyists and translators of both are fallible persons.


So that would be one way by which we could guage the truthfulness of the BOM, whether we believed the bible to be true or not. I am quite sure that you are very good at harmonizing the two, and I am equally sure that we wouldn't be in agreement with each other's varying interpretation of either book. So at this point we should stay away from such an undertaking.


JOHN MORMON:
If you say so.

POWELL:
As a Christian you're probably capable of harmonizing apparently contradictory passages in the N.T. with those in the O.T. For example, Jesus claims in Mark 2 that the Pharisees should have been able to READ where David went to the house of God during the days of Abiathar the high priest and gave showbread to men with him, but someone couldn't read that in the O.T. because it's not there. For two things, Abiathar was not high priest and wasn't even the priest involved. For another thing, the story in 1 Sam 20-21 implies David was alone running for his life. David CLAIMED to be on a secret mission of haste for the king and to have men with him as part of an elaborate lie to get Ahimelech the priest (not Abiathar the HIGH priest) to help him.


The more important question remains, is the BOM the Word of God? And isn't there a way to determine that apart from how either of us feel about it? I think that we would be in agreement when I say that there are many people, while very sincere, that are sincerely wrong.


JOHN MORMON:
How did you determine that the Bible was the Word of God? Because your parents and others you trust told you as much? That's fine to start with, but eventually you need to rely on your own testimony, not the borrowed testimony of others. YOU need God to reveal to YOU that the Bible is true. The same about the Book of Mormon. Even with that revelation you can't know for sure that you aren't deceived, but it's the best there is. You have to live on faith.


So apart from your feelings and personal testimony, why should I believe the BOM to be what it claims to be?


JOHN MORMON:
You can look for external evidences of the Bible and Book of Mormon, but those aren't as persuasive as a spirit-to-spirit revelation from the Holy Ghost. You could even see God and it would not be as impressive as what the Holy Ghost can do. Peter denied Jesus three times before the cock crowed twice even after having seen angels and walking on the water and seeing all those miracles, but once Peter received the gift of the Holy Ghost, Peter never denied again. You can be forgiven for denying visions, but to deny the witness of the Holy Ghost is unpardonable because God can't really provide any witness stronger than that.


troutk13

PS. John Powell (JP with your permission?) when you say that your are a strong atheist, are you claiming the absolute negative position, that in fact God does not exist?


POWELL:
I'm claiming that I'm confident (not certain) that God does not exist like I'm confident that Santa Claus, as usually described, does not exist.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Argument by assertion. In what way did I "change the direction"? What was the original direction and what was the new direction?

The onus of proof is now upon me to demonstrate the truthfulness of the Bible, when in fact the BOM has issued the challenge and is the new kid on the block.



JOHN MORMON:
You didn't seem to finish your thought.

Sorry JM, I had too many irons in the fire. The remainder of my sentence didn't serve to further my point, and I didn't erase it all.



POWELL:
As a Christian you're probably capable of harmonizing apparently contradictory passages in the N.T. with those in the O.T. For example, Jesus claims in Mark 2 that the Pharisees should have been able to READ where David went to the house of God during the days of Abiathar the high priest and gave showbread to men with him, but someone couldn't read that in the O.T. because it's not there. For two things, Abiathar was not high priest and wasn't even the priest involved. For another thing, the story in 1 Sam 20-21 implies David was alone running for his life. David CLAIMED to be on a secret mission of haste for the king and to have men with him as part of an elaborate lie to get Ahimelech the priest (not Abiathar the HIGH priest) to help him.

What I would deem a satisfactory explanation of that particular situation, JP would probably not be content with. And I'm quite sure you are well read in that particular passage.


JOHN MORMON:
How did you determine that the Bible was the Word of God? Because your parents and others you trust told you as much? That's fine to start with, but eventually you need to rely on your own testimony, not the borrowed testimony of others. YOU need God to reveal to YOU that the Bible is true. The same about the Book of Mormon. Even with that revelation you can't know for sure that you aren't deceived, but it's the best there is. You have to live on faith.

Actually Christianity wasn't spoken of in my upbringing, my father had a deep dislike for Christianity, and called himself an atheist for many years. Where the words of the Bible rang objectively true in my life was it's uncanny explanation of my condition.

JOHN MORMON:
You can look for external evidences of the Bible and Book of Mormon, but those aren't as persuasive as a spirit-to-spirit revelation from the Holy Ghost. You could even see God and it would not be as impressive as what the Holy Ghost can do. Peter denied Jesus three times before the cock crowed twice even after having seen angels and walking on the water and seeing all those miracles, but once Peter received the gift of the Holy Ghost, Peter never denied again. You can be forgiven for denying visions, but to deny the witness of the Holy Ghost is unpardonable because God can't really provide any witness stronger than that.

I wouldn't argue with that idea, but when I look for evidences of the Bible's authenticity, I see many historical and archeological reasons to think that at least some of the Bible can be verified objectively.

I don't see any maps in the appendix of the BOM.

[dizzle]

John, due to your background as a former Mormon and your ability to argue from that prior position, you are welcomed to participate in these discussions, but please keep in mind that this is not the area for theist v atheist debates or arguments, and i have to ask that such be kept from the comparative religions department which is primarily a theist area and not an area for any arguments undermining theism in general or advocating atheism - I noticed this thread was going at time in that direction. Thanks. We can split any such posts that have generated conversations into Apologetics at request, just let me or Trout know.

[John Powell]

POWELL:
Thanks for the reminder, Dee Dee. Ok, Troutk13, POWELL may answer questions from a non-Mormon point of view, but he should avoid arguing FOR atheism in this section of TWEB. JOHN MORMON will argue for Mormonism.

JOHN MORMON:
Argument by assertion. In what way did I "change the direction"? What was the original direction and what was the new direction?

TROUTK13:
The onus of proof is now upon me to demonstrate the truthfulness of the Bible, when in fact the BOM has issued the challenge and is the new kid on the block.


POWELL:
Is that what you mean by me changing direction from justifying belief in the Book of Mormon to justifying belief in the Bible? I guess I did do that. My point is that the spiritual reasons you give for believing in the Bible should be applicable to other scriptures that God may have inspired. The question for you should be whether the Book of Mormon counts as new scripture NOT that the Book of Mormon must be false because it claims to be scripture, but it's not the Bible.

JOHN MORMON:
You didn't seem to finish your thought.

TROUTK13:
Sorry JM, I had too many irons in the fire. The remainder of my sentence didn't serve to further my point, and I didn't erase it all.

POWELL:
As a Christian you're probably capable of harmonizing apparently contradictory passages in the N.T. with those in the O.T. For example, Jesus claims in Mark 2 that the Pharisees should have been able to READ where David went to the house of God during the days of Abiathar the high priest and gave showbread to men with him, but someone couldn't read that in the O.T. because it's not there. For two things, Abiathar was not high priest and wasn't even the priest involved. For another thing, the story in 1 Sam 20-21 implies David was alone running for his life. David CLAIMED to be on a secret mission of haste for the king and to have men with him as part of an elaborate lie to get Ahimelech the priest (not Abiathar the HIGH priest) to help him.

TROUTK13:
What I would deem a satisfactory explanation of that particular situation, JP would probably not be content with. And I'm quite sure you are well read in that particular passage.

JOHN MORMON:
How did you determine that the Bible was the Word of God? Because your parents and others you trust told you as much? That's fine to start with, but eventually you need to rely on your own testimony, not the borrowed testimony of others. YOU need God to reveal to YOU that the Bible is true. The same about the Book of Mormon. Even with that revelation you can't know for sure that you aren't deceived, but it's the best there is. You have to live on faith.

TROUTK13:
Actually Christianity wasn't spoken of in my upbringing, my father had a deep dislike for Christianity, and called himself an atheist for many years. Where the words of the Bible rang objectively true in my life was it's uncanny explanation of my condition.


JOHN MORMON:
Would you like to be more specific? Perhaps there are passages in the Book of Mormon that also will explain, in an uncanny way, your condition in life if you give it a chance. Remember that the Bible is a collection of books. Presumably only PARTS of the Bible did this uncanny thing for you. Other parts of the Bible were probably neutral with respect to your condition. Perhaps the Book of Mormon is like the other parts of the Bible that are true, but didn't "ring true" in an uncanny way to your condition, just yet.

Surely, you aren't suggesting that we accept as true only the specific versus of scripture that "explain our condition in an uncanny way," right?

JOHN MORMON:
You can look for external evidences of the Bible and Book of Mormon, but those aren't as persuasive as a spirit-to-spirit revelation from the Holy Ghost. You could even see God and it would not be as impressive as what the Holy Ghost can do. Peter denied Jesus three times before the cock crowed twice even after having seen angels and walking on the water and seeing all those miracles, but once Peter received the gift of the Holy Ghost, Peter never denied again. You can be forgiven for denying visions, but to deny the witness of the Holy Ghost is unpardonable because God can't really provide any witness stronger than that.

TROUTK13:
I wouldn't argue with that idea, but when I look for evidences of the Bible's authenticity, I see many historical and archeological reasons to think that at least some of the Bible can be verified objectively.


JOHN MORMON:
There are more external evidences for the Bible for a number of reasons. However, again it's the spiritual witness that should persuade us to believe God's Word is true, not because some archaeologist claims they found evidence for Noah's flood or something like that. If we rely on that kind of evidence, what will we do if the archaeologist retracts his claim? God won't retract the spiritual witness He gives. That's something we can rely on.

TROUTK13:
I don't see any maps in the appendix of the BOM.


JOHN MORMON:
Patience. People are working on it. The Indians weren't as good as the Middle Eastern peoples in preserving their cities and their stories.

There aren't maps in the Bible for the Garden of Eden, and other pre-Deluvian places either. That should not compel us to discard the first part of Genesis as false, right?

John Powell

[studyhound]

I get a "burning in the bosom" when I've had too much coffee.
:lol: I have a burning in my bosom, Oh wait you said BOSOM, cause I had a burrito today and it was really funky. . . . .:outtie:


:studyhound:

[Trout]

JM,

Will you, as a Mormon, please read the Bible cover to cover and ask God to reveal to you that it contains all of God's message to man and that parts are not lost or altered and that the Book of Mormon is false?

And if you are sincere enough you'll get the right answer, if you don't get the right answer then repeat step 1.

[John Powell]

JM,

Will you, as a Mormon, please read the Bible cover to cover and ask God to reveal to you that it contains all of God's message to man and that parts are not lost or altered and that the Book of Mormon is false?

And if you are sincere enough you'll get the right answer, if you don't get the right answer then repeat step 1.

JOHN MORMON:
The question I asked was whether the Bible was the Word of God, not whether it contained ALL of God's message or had no flaws in it. The answer I feel like I got was "yes."

A Jew could ask the same of you, to ask God to reveal to you whether the Tanach (Old Testament) contains ALL of God's message to man and that parts are not altered or lost and that the New Testament is false.

Really, Jews are in a difficult position. Christians aren't claiming that the Jewish scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He? Likewise, Mormons aren't claiming that the Christian scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He?

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
The question I asked was whether the Bible was the Word of God, not whether it contained ALL of God's message or had no flaws in it. The answer I feel like I got was "yes."
The Bible is true or not true completely apart from how I feel about it.



A Jew could ask the same of you, to ask God to reveal to you whether the Tanach (Old Testament) contains ALL of God's message to man and that parts are not altered or lost and that the New Testament is false.
The Jew's aren't the new kids on the block. It seems as though the Mormons are, so I am looking for a reason to think that what they are saying is true.


Really, Jews are in a difficult position. Christians aren't claiming that the Jewish scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He? Likewise, Mormons aren't claiming that the Christian scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He?

John Powell
God can do anything He wants to, the question remains did God reaveal more through the prophet Joseph Smith?

And if so, why should I think He did?

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
The question I asked was whether the Bible was the Word of God, not whether it contained ALL of God's message or had no flaws in it. The answer I feel like I got was "yes."

TROUTK13:
The Bible is true or not true completely apart from how I feel about it.


JOHN MORMON:
Yes, but as I've asked you elsewhere recently, Why do YOU believe the Bible is true?

JOHN MORMON:
A Jew could ask the same of you, to ask God to reveal to you whether the Tanach (Old Testament) contains ALL of God's message to man and that parts are not altered or lost and that the New Testament is false.

TROUTK13:
The Jew's aren't the new kids on the block. It seems as though the Mormons are, so I am looking for a reason to think that what they are saying is true.


JOHN MORMON:
By reading the Book of Mormon with the proper attitude and praying sincerely to that God you believe in to reveal to you whether it's true.

JOHN MORMON:
Really, Jews are in a difficult position. Christians aren't claiming that the Jewish scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He? Likewise, Mormons aren't claiming that the Christian scriptures are false, but that God has revealed more. Of course God CAN do that. The question is did He?

John Powell

TROUTK13:
God can do anything He wants to, the question remains did God reaveal more through the prophet Joseph Smith?


JOHN MORMON:
Exactly.

TROUTK13:
And if so, why should I think He did?


JOHN MORMON:
Because it would be a good thing to have the true church restored with Apostles who have seen visions of Jesus and Prophets who write new scriptures and then reading the Book of Mormon with the right attitude and then praying to God to ask God for confirmation that it's true.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, but as I've asked you elsewhere recently, Why do YOU believe the Bible is true?
I have no reason to believe otherwise.

JOHN MORMON:
By reading the Book of Mormon with the proper attitude and praying sincerely to that God you believe in to reveal to you whether it's true.
Why would my attitude about something make it true?


JOHN MORMON:
Because it would be a good thing to have the true church restored with Apostles who have seen visions of Jesus and Prophets who write new scriptures and then reading the Book of Mormon with the right attitude and then praying to God to ask God for confirmation that it's true.

John Powell
"Confirmation that it's true", and what would God be confirming, I have no reason to believe the BOM is the Word of God.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, but as I've asked you elsewhere recently, Why do YOU believe the Bible is true?

TROUTK13:
I have no reason to believe otherwise.


JOHN MORMON:
Then why can't that apply to the Book of Mormon too?

JOHN MORMON:
By reading the Book of Mormon with the proper attitude and praying sincerely to that God you believe in to reveal to you whether it's true.

TROUTK13:
Why would my attitude about something make it true?


JOHN MORMON:
It wouldn't. It would put you in the right frame of mind to HEAR the answer coming from God. Tuning your radio to the right frequency doesn't make the composers create beautiful music, but it enables YOU to hear what they've composed.

JOHN MORMON:
Because it would be a good thing to have the true church restored with Apostles who have seen visions of Jesus and Prophets who write new scriptures and then reading the Book of Mormon with the right attitude and then praying to God to ask God for confirmation that it's true.

TROUTK13:
"Confirmation that it's true", and what would God be confirming, . . .


JOHN MORMON:
God would be confirming that the Book of Mormon is true.

TROUTK13:
. . . I have no reason to believe the BOM is the Word of God.


JOHN MORMON:
Then why doesn't that attitude NOT apply to the Bible?

What reasons do you have to ACCEPT the Bible as the word of God, but REJECT the Book of Mormon?

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Then why can't that apply to the Book of Mormon too?

There are no good reasons to believe that the BOM is an inspired work.



JOHN MORMON:
It wouldn't. It would put you in the right frame of mind to HEAR the answer coming from God. Tuning your radio to the right frequency doesn't make the composers create beautiful music, but it enables YOU to hear what they've composed.


Truth isn't dependant upon mood, I can have a lousy attitude and still glean truth from the universe.



JOHN MORMON:
God would be confirming that the Book of Mormon is true.

We still have yet to determine whether or not I should ask God.



JOHN MORMON:
Then why doesn't that attitude NOT apply to the Bible?

What reasons do you have to ACCEPT the Bible as the word of God, but REJECT the Book of Mormon?

John Powell


There are many outside evidences that would lend credibility to the Bible, there are none in favor of the BOM.

[Lilith]

Would you like me to answer this one JM or JP? I am an archeology buff. At least in the latin america region. See, the BOM is new as you say Troutk13, which is why you don't find a map. The bible is quite old and people through research and common sense found where Jesus has been and also know where other prophets decided to wander. There's also the fact that the bible has stayed in the same region with people who lived knowing what happened not so far away. Not to mention the christians would go find pagans and shove the bible down their throats. So all of Europe was aware of what went on from the book of Genesis on up.
Now tell me. How widely known are the ancient civilizations in latin america as opposed to say the Roman empire, greek, Egyption, so on and so forth? Not very much I can tell you. And yet they dealt with the same things that the eastern part of the world was dealing with. Can you also tell me what those "other sheep" were that Jesus planned to visit? I am quite curious.

[Jin-Roh]

Lilith, using similiar logic, I could say that Jesus appeared in the far east.

[John Powell]

LILITH:
Would you like me to answer this one JM or JP?


POWELL:
Yes. Although some here might trust my answers to be more in line with Mormon Doctrine than yours, pretty much everyone probably would prefer to see the answers of a "true" believer rather merely those of my "JOHN MORMON."

You're encouraged to answer every question they ask of Mormonism even if I've given an answer. If you agree or disagree with my answers then say so. If you disagree, I will likely defend my understanding of Mormonism against your own.

LILITH:
I am an archeology buff. At least in the latin america region. See, the BOM is new as you say Troutk13, which is why you don't find a map. The bible is quite old and people through research and common sense found where Jesus has been and also know where other prophets decided to wander. There's also the fact that the bible has stayed in the same region with people who lived knowing what happened not so far away. Not to mention the christians would go find pagans and shove the bible down their throats. So all of Europe was aware of what went on from the book of Genesis on up.


POWELL:
Pretty good. The geographical area of the Book of Mormon has not had as much archaeology done so it's not surprising to you that it has not had as much confirmed as Biblical archaeology has.

LILITH:
Now tell me. How widely known are the ancient civilizations in latin america as opposed to say the Roman empire, greek, Egyption, so on and so forth? Not very much I can tell you. And yet they dealt with the same things that the eastern part of the world was dealing with. Can you also tell me what those "other sheep" were that Jesus planned to visit? I am quite curious.


POWELL:
Good question about the "other sheep."

John Powell

[John Powell]

JIN-ROH:
Lilith, using similiar logic, I could say that Jesus appeared in the far east.


JOHN MORMON:
Maybe Jesus did. After visiting the Lehites in the Americas, Jesus went to visit the lost 10 tribes, wherever they were (3 Ne 17:4). Maybe some of them were in the far east.

Where are their scriptures testifying to the visit of Jesus?

John Powell

[Jin-Roh]

JOHN MORMON:
Maybe Jesus did. After visiting the Lehites in the Americas, Jesus went to visit the lost 10 tribes, wherever they were (3 Ne 17:4). Maybe some of them were in the far east.

Maybe he visited my apartment last night too.
My point was that just because we haven't looked hard enough (and I am willing to concede that much), does not mean that such evidence is there to find.

Where are their scriptures testifying to the visit of Jesus?

John Powell

You've opened yourself up for some serious satire here JM, but I'd actually rather keep it civil for now.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Maybe Jesus did. After visiting the Lehites in the Americas, Jesus went to visit the lost 10 tribes, wherever they were (3 Ne 17:4). Maybe some of them were in the far east.

JIN-ROH:
Maybe he visited my apartment last night too.

My point was that just because we haven't looked hard enough (and I am willing to concede that much), does not mean that such evidence is there to find.


JOHN MORMON:
My point is that Mormons do not deny that God can reveal more than just the Bible, in opposition to the view of most Christians who think the Bible is all there is.

We believe that Jesus visited the 10 tribes after visiting the Americas so if it appears that they were in Asia and there are scriptures they recorded then we Mormons would be interested in learning what Jesus told them.

The claimant to revelation should indicate what was revealed and what happened during the revelation. If either the doctrine or nature of the persons revealed contradicts what God has elsewhere revealed then it's likely to be a mistake one way or the other. Maybe the person is a charlatan or maybe Satan is appearing to them.

Since there are now authorized prophets on the Earth, certain global truths should be revealed through them rather than any old person. For example, if Jesus planned to come to Earth tomorrow then His prophet should be the one to tell the world, not some other person. It's possible that God would pick someone other than the prophet for this, but I would need to hear the details of the message to believe it.

JOHN MORMON:
Where are their scriptures testifying to the visit of Jesus?

John Powell

JIN-ROH:
You've opened yourself up for some serious satire here JM, but I'd actually rather keep it civil for now.


JOHN MORMON:
If my views are worthy of your satire then do it.

John Powell

[Trout]

. . . See, the BOM is new as you say Troutk13, which is why you don't find a map.The bible is quite old and people through research and common sense found where Jesus has been and also know where other prophets decided to wander. There's also the fact that the bible has stayed in the same region with people who lived knowing what happened not so far away. Not to mention the christians would go find pagans and shove the bible down their throats. So all of Europe was aware of what went on from the book of Genesis on up.



Good point, many of the civilations and cities spoken of in the Bible continue to exist today.



Now tell me. How widely known are the ancient civilizations in latin america as opposed to say the Roman empire, greek, Egyption, so on and so forth? Not very much I can tell you.



I think that the existence of many early Latin American civilizations are fairly well known at this point. I don't think we know as much about the workings of their cultures as we do the Romans, Greeks, etc.



Can you also tell me what those "other sheep" were that Jesus planned to visit? I am quite curious.



When Jesus speaks of "other sheep" I think that He means the gospel isn't confined to the nation Israel, but will be opened up to the gentiles also.

[kingsmusician1]

I get a "burning in the bosom" when I've had too much coffee.
:lol:
I get mine from one to many bean burritos.

[John Powell]

POWELL:
Lilith didn't answer this, so I guess I should let John Mormon respond.

LILITH:
Can you also tell me what those "other sheep" were that Jesus planned to visit? I am quite curious.

TROUT:
When Jesus speaks of "other sheep" I think that He means the gospel isn't confined to the nation Israel, but will be opened up to the gentiles also.


JOHN MORMON:
You might want to reconsider, Trout.

Matt 15:24
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


John 10: 16
16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.


JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel." Others, like Paul, will be sent to the Gentiles. Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites. According to the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites and Nephites in the Americas which heard the voice of Jesus were Israelites.

POWELL:
Unless you can come up with a lot better answer than the one you suggested, Trout, it would appear that the Mormons have a "reasonable" (within the Bible-believing paradigm) way to fulfill the words of Jesus in Matt 15:24 and John 10:16 that you don't.

John Powell

[Trout]

Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites.
John Powell

Trout:
Jesus didn't preach strictly to Israelites.
And Paul didn't die to make atonement for the sins of the gentiles.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites.

Trout:
Jesus didn't preach strictly to Israelites.


JOHN MORMON:
I didn't say that. If Jesus preached to a few isolated non-Israelites that's His choice, but wouldn't you agree that He was sent only to the Israelites? It would have been a contradiction for Him to go to Greece to preach to the Gentiles, yes?

Trout:
And Paul didn't die to make atonement for the sins of the gentiles.


JOHN MORMON:
I didn't say he did. We're talking "hear His [Jesus'] voice" and "be one fold." Being one fold is symbolic (being sheep is symbolic), but I don't think "hear His voice" is. What Jesus apparently meant is that there were other Israelites besides those in Palestine whom He needed to minister to personally. The Book of Mormon related just such a ministry in 3 Nephi 11.

Do you have a better way to fulfill the "other sheep" and "only Israel" passages?

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel."

JOHN MORMON:
I didn't say that.
TROUT:
What did you say?

[John Powell]

POWELL:
This is partly to answer Trout's question of what I said. I've added boldfacing.

JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel." Others, like Paul, will be sent to the Gentiles. Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites. According to the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites and Nephites in the Americas which heard the voice of Jesus were Israelites.

TROUT:
Jesus didn't preach strictly to Israelites.
And Paul didn't die to make atonement for the sins of the gentiles.

JOHN MORMON:
I didn't say that. If Jesus preached to a few isolated non-Israelites that's His choice, but wouldn't you agree that He was sent only to the Israelites? It would have been a contradiction for Him to go to Greece to preach to the Gentiles, yes?

TROUT:
What did you say?


JOHN MORMON:
I said Jesus was only sent to Israel. Do you agree?

You said Jesus did not only preach to Israel. I didn't deny that.

John Powell.

[Trout]

So then He wasn't only sent to the nation Israel in the manner you suggested.

[John Powell]

So then He wasn't only sent to the nation Israel in the manner you suggested.

JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. That's what Jesus said.

What do you think Jesus meant by the following words?

Matt 15:24
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


JOHN MORMON:
If Jesus CHOOSES to preach to a few others outside of that target group who grab His attention while He's working on that task then that's HIS PREROGATIVE. However, He would not be expected to make a special trip to preach to the Gentiles, like those in Greece or Rome.

On the other hand, if Jesus made a special trip to the Americas to preach to them and if they were Israelites then that would seem to be a reasonable fulfillment of His "other sheep" words without violating His "only Israel" words.

Your suggestion that the other sheep are the Gentiles would seem to be a mistake since Jesus was not sent to the Gentiles. Except for rare exceptions, the Gentiles of that day did not hear the voice of Jesus like the Israelites in Palestine and the Americas did.

John Powell

[Trout]

Who died to atone for those among the gentiles who would answer the call of salvation?

[John Powell]

TROUT:
Who died to atone for those among the gentiles who would answer the call of salvation?


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus, of course. Jesus died for the sins of EVERYONE who might benefit from His atonement.

However, Jesus said He was "not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Surely that does not mean His atonement was only applicable to the Israelites.

What do you think Jesus meant by those words, Trout?

I think it means that His personal ministry was to the Israelites, not also to the Gentiles. However, if a Gentile "dog" grabs His attention while He's attending to the "children" then it's His PREROGATIVE to give some spiritual food to the poor thing. His job, however, was to feed the children, not the dogs. Feeding the Gentiles was to be someone else's job.

John Powell

[Trout]

John Mormon,

You have admitted that Jesus didn't preach strictly to the Nation Israel, and He didn't atone strictly for the Jewish race, his preaching and atonement were also directed toward the gentiles, so I'm afraid that your original point needs to be altered.

And if my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct, the term "lost sheep" is refering to the tribes who took the Jaredite journey, those in Jerusalem weren't the "lost sheep".

If that is the case, then Jesus should have went only to the American continent.

[John Powell]

TROUT:
John Mormon,

You have admitted that Jesus didn't preach strictly to the Nation Israel, and He didn't atone strictly for the Jewish race, his preaching and atonement were also directed toward the gentiles, so I'm afraid that your original point needs to be altered.


JOHN MORMON:
I don't agree that change is needed. I claim that the personal ministry of Jesus was to the House of Israel, but He, being God, could ELECT to deviate from that in a limited number of occasions.

You still have not answered my question, Trout. What did Jesus mean in Matt 15:24 by initially ignoring the Canaanite woman and telling His disciples that He was "not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel"?

TROUT:
And if my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct, the term "lost sheep" is refering [sic] to the tribes who took the Jaredite journey, those in Jerusalem weren't the "lost sheep".


JOHN MORMON:
Your understanding is not correct. Jesus speaks of losing one sheep out of a hundred and going after it (Matt 18:12-13; Luke 15:4-6). He was not speaking of just the Jaredites there, but any sinner. There were lots of lost sheep among the Gentiles, but Jesus was NOT sent to them. It was not HIS job on Earth to gather them. That would be the job of others.

If the phrase "lost tribes of Israel" were used in an LDS context then most likely that would be referring to the Israelites taken captive by the Assyrians. However, in this context Jesus is clearly referring to Israelites who are spiritually lost regardless whether they are physically missing from Palestine. Mormons believe that Jesus visited those physically lost tribes after His visit to the Americas.

TROUT:
If that is the case, then Jesus should have went [sic] only to the American continent.


JOHN MORMON:
Perhaps, but that's not the case.

Let me explain what I think the passages mean and you tell me what you think, ok?

MATT 15:
21 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.


JOHN MORMON:
Tyre and Sidon were ancient Phoenician cities, but lots of Jews lived there.

MATT 15:
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.


JOHN MORMON:
While on His ministry to the Israelites in the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, a non-Israelite woman believes Jesus has the power to heal her daughter and asks for His assistance.

MATT 15:
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus initially ignores her because He was sent to preach to the Israelites, not the Gentiles. The disciples, however, ask Him to send her away (with what she asked for?) so they aren't bothered by her requests.

MATT 15:
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus tells them that His personal ministry on Earth is directed to the Israelites, not the Gentiles. With His limited time on Earth He can't afford to make a special ministry to the Gentiles too. Presumably, others would minister as His representatives to the Gentiles.

MATT 15:
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.


JOHN MORMON:
The woman is insistent. She's desperate to heal her daughter and the miracle-working Jesus is clearly the answer. She believes Jesus is the Savior.

MATT 15:
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus is likening the children to the Israelites and the dogs to the Gentiles. He's affirming that it's not right to take the spiritual food intended for the children of the master and give it, instead, to the dogs. Since Jesus is sent to preach to the Israelites, the Israelites would lose out if He started spending time preaching to the Gentiles.

To even spend time speaking to her was taking away from the time He might be fulfilling His ministry to the Israelites, yet He ELECTS to do so.

MATT 15:
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.


JOHN MORMON:
The woman apparently understands His meaning and smartly argues that all she's asking for is a little concession and she'll go away happy.

MATT 15:
28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus rewards her faith and skilled insistence with the blessing she desired in a more casual way than by going to the girl personally, like someone might toss table scraps to a dog rather than carefully feeding the child by hand. Jesus presumably then returned to preaching to the Israelites.

Now, let's look at what Jesus told the twelve when He early had sent them forth.

Matt 10
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus is clearly NOT instructing the twelve to go to the Americas, but to preach to the Jews in Palestine and avoid the Gentiles and near-Jews like the Samaritans.

From a Mormon perspective, it would be like instructing a Church official to minister specifically to active Mormons and to avoid non-Mormons and apostate Mormons.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel." Others, like Paul, will be sent to the Gentiles. Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites. According to the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites and Nephites in the Americas which heard the voice of Jesus were Israelites.

That was your original statement, you have now admitted that Jesus didn't preach exclusively to the Jews and that He had sheep that were among the Gentiles, you have added no reasons to believe that the pre-resurrection Christ visited the Americas. So it would seem that the explanation that I gave is still the more reasonable of the two.

[John Powell]

That was your original statement, you have now admitted that Jesus didn't preach exclusively to the Jews and that He had sheep that were among the Gentiles, you have added no reasons to believe that the pre-resurrection Christ visited the Americas. So it would seem that the explanation that I gave is still the more reasonable of the two.

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Jesus had sheep among the Gentiles, but those were NOT sheep that He was sent to. He was NOT sent to gather those Gentile sheep during His Earthly ministry. That was for some others to do AFTER He left.

You STILL refuse to answer my question, Trout. WHAT DID JESUS MEAN when He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

And, please answer the related question I recently asked: what do you think Jesus meant by "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

Would you PLEASE answer these two questions?

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Jesus had sheep among the Gentiles, but those were NOT sheep that He was sent to.
Then the question remains; why was He sent to this gentile woman? If, as you say, He was only sent to the Jews, then there is no place in His ministry for this woman's conversion.

He was NOT sent to gather those Gentile sheep during His Earthly ministry. That was for some others to do AFTER He left.
Then why did He gather this woman from among the Gentiles?

It would seem that the answer I gave in response to Lilith's question continues to be the more valid of the two explanations.


When Jesus speaks of "other sheep" I think that He means the gospel isn't confined to the nation Israel, but will be opened up to the gentiles also.
You have offered no evidence of a pre-resurrection visit from Christ to His "other sheep" in the America's.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Will you please answer these two questions, Trout?

Q1. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

Q2. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Jesus had sheep among the Gentiles, but those were NOT sheep that He was sent to.

TROUT:
Then the question remains; why was He sent to this gentile woman? If, as you say, He was only sent to the Jews, then there is no place in His ministry for this woman's conversion.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was not "sent" to this Gentile woman. She imposed herself upon Him and His disciples while He was doing what He was "sent" to do which was to preach to the lost sheep of Israel. He initially ignored her, but ended up giving her what she asked for because of her great faith. Jesus had the PREROGATIVE to go somewhat outside the bounds of the specific task the Father had sent Him to do.

Your comment seems to be based on a view that the actions of Jesus were predetermined, they were pre-known by God and so had to be a certain way, no ifs, ands, or buts. On the contrary, Jesus had free will.

JOHN MORMON:
He was NOT sent to gather those Gentile sheep during His Earthly ministry. That was for some others to do AFTER He left.

TROUT:
Then why did He gather this woman from among the Gentiles?


JOHN MORMON:
It was already a Jewish custom to allow Jewish converts, so it's to be expected that the Jewish Christians allowed the same thing. Presumably, she was baptized into the Christian religion shortly after this event. However, she was not the target audience of Jesus. He was sent to the Israelites.

TROUT:
It would seem that the answer I gave in response to Lilith's question continues to be the more valid of the two explanations.


POWELL (the atheist):
That depends on what are your answers to the two questions above.

TROUT:
When Jesus speaks of "other sheep" I think that He means the gospel isn't confined to the nation Israel, but will be opened up to the gentiles also.

You have offered no evidence of a pre-resurrection visit from Christ to His "other sheep" in the America's.


JOHN MORMON:
I never claimed a pre-resurrection visit of Jesus to the Americas. It is a post-resurrection visit.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was not "sent" to this Gentile woman. She imposed herself upon Him and His disciples while He was doing what He was "sent" to do which was to preach to the lost sheep of Israel. He initially ignored her, but ended up giving her what she asked for because of her great faith. Jesus had the PREROGATIVE to go somewhat outside the bounds of the specific task the Father had sent Him to do.

So in other words, the woman was "sent" to Jesus, and Jesus wasn't prohibited from ministering to her as a Gentile. In fact, He made her a "fellowcitizen" in good standing of the "Nation Israel", as that term is understood spiritually. The meaning of the statement, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" doesn't mean He was forbidden from preaching to Gentiles, or ministering to them, in fact, the story of the woman serves as a precursor to the admittance of the Gentiles into the Kingdom of God which we observe happened after the resurrection.


Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Christ Our Peace For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father. Christ Our Cornerstone Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God

Q1. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

When He made that statement, He was affirming His primary mission to His disciples, making it clear to them that the Grace He was about to dispense, while contrary to His "strict" commission, was a spontaneous demonstration of His mercy, and still within His authority.

Q2. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

Compare the first commission given by Christ to His disciples with His commission given to them in Matthew 28. Until His resurrection, the preaching of the new covenant wasn't available to the Gentiles, but was restricted to the "lost sheep" of the house of Israel.

JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel." Others, like Paul, will be sent to the Gentiles. Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites.

Your explanation of these events fails at every count.

Jesus wasn't restricted from preaching or dispensing grace to the Gentiles.

At the time of His resurrection, the prohibition of preaching to the Gentiles was lifted and a new command issued, that His disciples should take the gospel to all nations.

By your own admission, it was the resurrected Christ that visited the Americas, this would have been after the prohibition had been lifted, and He was free in every respect to make known the new covenant to anyone from any nation.


According to the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites and Nephites in the Americas which heard the voice of Jesus were Israelites.

Too bad that there exists no evidence indicating that the inhabitants of the Americas are in fact descendants of the Jewish nation.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was not "sent" to this Gentile woman. She imposed herself upon Him and His disciples while He was doing what He was "sent" to do which was to preach to the lost sheep of Israel. He initially ignored her, but ended up giving her what she asked for because of her great faith. Jesus had the PREROGATIVE to go somewhat outside the bounds of the specific task the Father had sent Him to do.

TROUT:
So in other words, the woman was "sent" to Jesus, and Jesus wasn't prohibited from ministering to her as a Gentile. In fact, He made her a "fellowcitizen" in good standing of the "Nation Israel", as that term is understood spiritually. The meaning of the statement, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" doesn't mean He was forbidden from preaching to Gentiles, or ministering to them, in fact, the story of the woman serves as a precursor to the admittance of the Gentiles into the Kingdom of God which we observe happened after the resurrection.


JOHN MORMON:
You seem to think God is behind every thing that happens in the universe, Trout. If someone comes to see Jesus then it MUST have been because God caused her to go. God surely inspired her, suggested she go, but it's up to her. She had free agency. She went because she wanted to, not because God made her do it either because of His omnipotence or because of His omniscience.

TROUT:

Eph. 2:11-19
Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Christ Our Peace For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father. Christ Our Cornerstone Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God



JOHN MORMON:
Gentiles become adopted into the house of Israel, but they aren't "lost sheep of Israel" before that.

JOHN MORMON:
Q1. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

TROUT:
When He made that statement, He was affirming His primary mission to His disciples, making it clear to them that the Grace He was about to dispense, while contrary to His "strict" commission, was a spontaneous demonstration of His mercy, and still within His authority.


JOHN MORMON:
That's not so, Trout. Jesus did NOT merely say "I am sent to the lost sheep of Israel" implying that was His primary mission, but that He might also spend considerable time preaching to the Gentiles, but He essentially said "I am ONLY sent to the lost sheep of Israel." Any mission to the Gentiles was EXPRESSLY denied as what He, personally, was sent to do.

JOHN MORMON:
Q2. In your opinion, what did Jesus mean when He said "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."?

TROUT:
Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost


TROUT:
Compare the first commission given by Christ to His disciples with His commission given to them in Matthew 28. Until His resurrection, the preaching of the new covenant wasn't available to the Gentiles, but was restricted to the "lost sheep" of the house of Israel.


JOHN MORMON:
That's creative interpretation, Trout, but notice that Jesus is telling the disciples that THEY are to do this. He does NOT indicate that now HE PERSONALLY is going to do it. In fact, Trout, JESUS DOESN'T DO IT! Unless you can show that Jesus then had a significant PERSONAL ministry to the Gentiles, you would seem to still be supporting an inferior fulfillment of the "other sheep" passage.

JOHN MORMON:
So Jesus is sent only to "Israel." Others, like Paul, will be sent to the Gentiles. Consequently, if there are other sheep that Jesus must preach to personally they should be Israelites.

TROUT:
Your explanation of these events fails at every count.


JOHN MORMON:
Your quote in Matt supports the view that OTHERS, not Jesus, were sent to the Gentiles.

TROUT:
Jesus wasn't restricted from preaching or dispensing grace to the Gentiles.


JOHN MORMON:
I've already conceded that, but Jesus was not SENT to preach to them or dispense grace to them in His personal ministry. That was for others to do.

TROUT:
At the time of His resurrection, the prohibition of preaching to the Gentiles was lifted and a new command issued, that His disciples should take the gospel to all nations.


JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but did JESUS then PERSONALLY gather those Gentile sheep as his "other sheep" words imply? No. Others did that. If there were "other sheep" that Jesus personally had to minister to they were presumably Israelites in parts of the world He had not gotten to, like the Americas.

TROUT:
By your own admission, it was the resurrected Christ that visited the Americas, this would have been after the prohibition had been lifted, and He was free in every respect to make known the new covenant to anyone from any nation.


JOHN MORMON:
The prohibition was to the disciples earlier on and then lifted at this time. JESUS sent the disciples only to Israel and then later JESUS sent the disciples also to the Gentiles. Do you think the same is true about the Father towards Jesus, that the Father sent Jesus to the Israelites earlier on, but then after the resurrection, the Father sent Jesus to the Gentiles?

If yes, then did Jesus do that?

If no, then doesn't the Mormon view still do a better job of fulfilling the "other sheep" words of Jesus?

JOHN MORMON:
According to the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites and Nephites in the Americas which heard the voice of Jesus were Israelites.

TROUT:
Too bad that there exists no evidence indicating that the inhabitants of the Americas are in fact descendants of the Jewish nation.


JOHN MORMON:
Sure there's evidence, Trout. There's the Book of Mormon.

If you're going to go that route, then what EVIDENCE is there that the first man and woman on the Earth only existed about 6000 years ago? If you insist that whatever the scientific consensus might be should be believed even if it appears to contradict the Book of Mormon, then you should do the same about the Bible. The scientific consensus is that the human species is hundreds of thousands of years old and was not merely one man made from mud and then one woman made from his rib.

POWELL (the atheist):
In case you're curious, Trout, this DNA problem was crucial to my deconversion.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
You seem to think God is behind every thing that happens in the universe, Trout. If someone comes to see Jesus then it MUST have been because God caused her to go. God surely inspired her, suggested she go, but it's up to her. She had free agency. She went because she wanted to, not because God made her do it either because of His omnipotence or because of His omniscience.

God, at the very least allows everything to happen that does happen in the universe, how that works mechanically I don't know. However in the case of the woman seeking out Christ, scripture makes that process clear:

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

JOHN MORMON:
Gentiles become adopted into the house of Israel, but they aren't "lost sheep of Israel" before that.

Agreed, but they are "other sheep" none the less.

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but did JESUS then PERSONALLY gather those Gentile sheep as his "other sheep" words imply? No. Others did that. If there were "other sheep" that Jesus personally had to minister to they were presumably Israelites in parts of the world He had not gotten to, like the Americas.

He, being "the Good Shephard" is the gatherer of all the sheep as indicated within the context of the passage; "the sheep follow him: for they know his voice". So to be numbered among the "flock", you must hear and heed the voice of Christ.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
You seem to think God is behind every thing that happens in the universe, Trout. If someone comes to see Jesus then it MUST have been because God caused her to go. God surely inspired her, suggested she go, but it's up to her. She had free agency. She went because she wanted to, not because God made her do it either because of His omnipotence or because of His omniscience.

TROUT:
God, at the very least allows everything to happen that does happen in the universe, how that works mechanically I don't know. However in the case of the woman seeking out Christ, scripture makes that process clear:

Jhn 6:44
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.



JOHN MORMON:
Right. No one comes to Jesus without being inspired to do so. That's different than being compelled to do so either by the force of God's omnipotence or by the logical necessity of God's omniscience.

JOHN MORMON:
Gentiles become adopted into the house of Israel, but they aren't "lost sheep of Israel" before that.

TROUT:
Agreed, but they are "other sheep" none the less.


JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but they aren't other sheep that Jesus personally was sent to gather. They are other sheep that others were sent to gather.

Was Jesus sent to gather Gentile sheep, Trout?

If yes, then doesn't that contradict what Jesus said earlier?

If no, then Gentiles can't seem to be the other sheep that Jesus would personally gather.

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but did JESUS then PERSONALLY gather those Gentile sheep as his "other sheep" words imply? No. Others did that. If there were "other sheep" that Jesus personally had to minister to they were presumably Israelites in parts of the world He had not gotten to, like the Americas.

TROUT:
He, being "the Good Shephard" is the gatherer of all the sheep as indicated within the context of the passage; "the sheep follow him: for they know his voice". So to be numbered among the "flock", you must hear and heed the voice of Christ.


JOHN MORMON:
Gentile sheep might follow Him too, but not because He was sent to gather them personally. It appears to me the only ones who could satisfy Christ's implication that He had other sheep to personally visit is that they were Israelites elsewhere in the world. Gentiles don't fit the description.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
You seem to think God is behind every thing that happens in the universe, Trout. If someone comes to see Jesus then it MUST have been because God caused her to go. God surely inspired her, suggested she go, but it's up to her. She had free agency. She went because she wanted to, not because God made her do it either because of His omnipotence or because of His omniscience.

TROUT:
God, at the very least allows everything to happen that does happen in the universe, how that works mechanically I don't know. However in the case of the woman seeking out Christ, scripture makes that process clear:


No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

JOHN MORMON:
Right. No one comes to Jesus without being inspired to do so. That's different than being compelled to do so either by the force of God's omnipotence or by the logical necessity of God's omniscience.

So while Jesus was sent in a strict sense to the Jews, that didn't prevent Him from gathering other sheep that would be found among the Gentiles.

JOHN MORMON:
Gentiles become adopted into the house of Israel, but they aren't "lost sheep of Israel" before that.

TROUT:
Agreed, but they are "other sheep" none the less.


JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but they aren't other sheep that Jesus personally was sent to gather. They are other sheep that others were sent to gather.

Was Jesus sent to gather Gentile sheep, Trout?

Yes, He is the Gatherer of all the sheep.


JM:
If yes, then doesn't that contradict what Jesus said earlier?

Not if it's read as an affirmation to His disciples of His primary mission. And not if you consider the fact that all are lost sheep, until we heed the voice of Christ.

JM:
If no, then Gentiles can't seem to be the other sheep that Jesus would personally gather.

Tell me; did Jesus visit every community where Jews lived?


JOHN MORMON:
Gentile sheep might follow Him too, but not because He was sent to gather them personally. It appears to me the only ones who could satisfy Christ's implication that He had other sheep to personally visit is that they were Israelites elsewhere in the world. Gentiles don't fit the description.

He personally gathers all the sheep, His sheep are those which hear His voice and heed His call.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
You seem to think God is behind every thing that happens in the universe, Trout. If someone comes to see Jesus then it MUST have been because God caused her to go. God surely inspired her, suggested she go, but it's up to her. She had free agency. She went because she wanted to, not because God made her do it either because of His omnipotence or because of His omniscience.

TROUT:
God, at the very least allows everything to happen that does happen in the universe, how that works mechanically I don't know. However in the case of the woman seeking out Christ, scripture makes that process clear:

Jhn 6:4
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.


JOHN MORMON:
Right. No one comes to Jesus without being inspired to do so. That's different than being compelled to do so either by the force of God's omnipotence or by the logical necessity of God's omniscience.

TROUT:
So while Jesus was sent in a strict sense to the Jews, that didn't prevent Him from gathering other sheep that would be found among the Gentiles.


JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost tribes of Israel. That's what Jesus said. However, Jesus could ELECT to gather a few others along the way, but that's not who He was sent to gather.

JOHN MORMON:
Gentiles become adopted into the house of Israel, but they aren't "lost sheep of Israel" before that.

TROUT:
Agreed, but they are "other sheep" none the less.

JOHN MORMON:
Yes, Trout, but they aren't other sheep that Jesus personally was sent to gather. They are other sheep that others were sent to gather.

Was Jesus sent to gather Gentile sheep, Trout?

TROUT:
Yes, He is the Gatherer of all the sheep.


JOHN MORMON:
I didn't ask if Jesus is the Gatherer of all the sheep but whether He was SENT to gather all the sheep. The answer is NO. He was ONLY sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel.

JOHN MORMON:
If yes, then doesn't that contradict what Jesus said earlier?

TROUT:
Not if it's read as an affirmation to His disciples of His primary mission. And not if you consider the fact that all are lost sheep, until we heed the voice of Christ.


JOHN MORMON:
That might be acceptable, Trout, if Jesus had said "I am sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel." That would suggest that His PRIMARY mission was to gather Israelites, but He might have a secondary mission to gather others.

However, you don't seem to understand the meaning of Jesus's words. He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Jesus DENIED that He was sent to personally gather any lost sheep EXCEPT those who were Israelites.

JOHN MORMON:
If no, then Gentiles can't seem to be the other sheep that Jesus would personally gather.

TROUT:
Tell me; did Jesus visit every community where Jews lived?


JOHN MORMON:
No. His words did not imply He had to visit EVERY little Israelite community, but He ought to visit the major locations, such as Palestine, some central population center in the Americas and whereaver the 10 tribes were located. There were a lot of Jews in Egypt so maybe He should have gone there. Maybe He did and we just don't have a record of it. His words imply that the ONLY sheep He was to personally gather were Israelites.

Let's suppose that an army recruiter is sent to gather military recruits during WWII. He is the supreme recruiter over all recruiters. A female calls out to him hoping to join and he says "I am not ordered but to gather MALE recruits" and tries to ignore her, but he ends up recruiting her. Would you be justified to say that his PRIMARY military ORDERS were to gather MALE recruits, but he was ALSO ORDERED to gather FEMALE recruits? I don't think so. He probably recruited her at his own discretion. Would you be justified in suggesting that those orders imply he should visit EVERY city in the country where there are potential male recruits? Certainly not, but he should go to the major cities. If he says there are other recruits he needs to gather that aren't in that group he's with should you assume he means other MALE recruits in other parts of the country or that he means FEMALE recruits in the same area that he's speaking? The answer should be obvious to you, Trout, that he would likely mean other MALES in other places.

JOHN MORMON:
Gentile sheep might follow Him too, but not because He was sent to gather them personally. It appears to me the only ones who could satisfy Christ's implication that He had other sheep to personally visit is that they were Israelites elsewhere in the world. Gentiles don't fit the description.

TROUT:
He personally gathers all the sheep, His sheep are those which hear His voice and heed His call.


JOHN MORMON:
No He doesn't, Trout. Jesus did some personal gathering while He was on Earth, but Jesus has representatives do most of the gathering since then. Jesus now personally sits on a throne up in heaven to the right of the Father. You should know that.

John Powell

[Trout]

JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost tribes of Israel. That's what Jesus said. However, Jesus could ELECT to gather a few others along the way, but that's not who He was sent to gather.

He was sent to the Samaritan woman.


JOHN MORMON:
I didn't ask if Jesus is the Gatherer of all the sheep but whether He was SENT to gather all the sheep. The answer is NO. He was ONLY sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel.

Which would be a valid way of reading that passage if indeed Jesus only gathered Jews.



JOHN MORMON:
That might be acceptable, Trout, if Jesus had said "I am sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel." That would suggest that His PRIMARY mission was to gather Israelites, but He might have a secondary mission to gather others.

However, you don't seem to understand the meaning of Jesus's words. He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Jesus DENIED that He was sent to personally gather any lost sheep EXCEPT those who were Israelites.

Which would make sense if He had refrained from gathering a gentile sheep a few verses later.


JOHN MORMON:
No. His words did not imply He had to visit EVERY little Israelite community, but He ought to visit the major locations, such as Palestine, some central population center in the Americas and whereaver the 10 tribes were located. There were a lot of Jews in Egypt so maybe He should have gone there. Maybe He did and we just don't have a record of it. His words imply that the ONLY sheep He was to personally gather were Israelites.

So if He didn't go to every lost sheep of the house of Israel He actually failed to make good on His comission, by your interpretation of the passage.


Let's suppose that an army recruiter is sent to gather military recruits during WWII. He is the supreme recruiter over all recruiters. A female calls out to him hoping to join and he says "I am not ordered but to gather MALE recruits" and tries to ignore her, but he ends up recruiting her. Would you be justified to say that his PRIMARY military ORDERS were to gather MALE recruits, but he was ALSO ORDERED to gather FEMALE recruits? I don't think so. He probably recruited her at his own discretion. Would you be justified in suggesting that those orders imply he should visit EVERY city in the country where there are potential male recruits? Certainly not, but he should go to the major cities. If he says there are other recruits he needs to gather that aren't in that group he's with should you assume he means other MALE recruits in other parts of the country or that he means FEMALE recruits in the same area that he's speaking? The answer should be obvious to you, Trout, that he would likely mean other MALES in other places.

A recruiter given specific military orders wouldn't go beyond the letter of the law in signing recruits. So by signing up one female recruit he would be breaking the rule he was given at the time his orders were issued.

But by Jesus gathering gentile sheep He wasn't breaking a rule that He had been given.



JOHN MORMON:
No He doesn't, Trout. Jesus did some personal gathering while He was on Earth, but Jesus has representatives do most of the gathering since then. Jesus now personally sits on a throne up in heaven to the right of the Father. You should know that.

John Powell

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

In order to follow Christ we must hear and heed His voice.

[John Powell]

JOHN MORMON:
Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost tribes of Israel. That's what Jesus said. However, Jesus could ELECT to gather a few others along the way, but that's not who He was sent to gather.

TROUT:
He was sent to the Samaritan woman.


JOHN MORMON:
Apparently not. He tried to avoid her. She persisted. He elected to respond to her.

JOHN MORMON:
I didn't ask if Jesus is the Gatherer of all the sheep but whether He was SENT to gather all the sheep. The answer is NO. He was ONLY sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel.

TROUT:
Which would be a valid way of reading that passage if indeed Jesus only gathered Jews.

JOHN MORMON:
That might be acceptable, Trout, if Jesus had said "I am sent to gather the lost sheep of Israel." That would suggest that His PRIMARY mission was to gather Israelites, but He might have a secondary mission to gather others.

However, you don't seem to understand the meaning of Jesus's words. He said "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Jesus DENIED that He was sent to personally gather any lost sheep EXCEPT those who were Israelites.

TROUT:
Which would make sense if He had refrained from gathering a gentile sheep a few verses later.

JOHN MORMON:
No. His words did not imply He had to visit EVERY little Israelite community, but He ought to visit the major locations, such as Palestine, some central population center in the Americas and whereaver the 10 tribes were located. There were a lot of Jews in Egypt so maybe He should have gone there. Maybe He did and we just don't have a record of it. His words imply that the ONLY sheep He was to personally gather were Israelites.

TROUT:
So if He didn't go to every lost sheep of the house of Israel He actually failed to make good on His comission, by your interpretation of the passage.


JOHN MORMON:
If Jesus had said He was sent to gather EVERY SINGLE lost sheep of Israel then yes. That's not what Jesus said, however.

JOHN MORMON:
Let's suppose that an army recruiter is sent to gather military recruits during WWII. He is the supreme recruiter over all recruiters. A female calls out to him hoping to join and he says "I am not ordered but to gather MALE recruits" and tries to ignore her, but he ends up recruiting her. Would you be justified to say that his PRIMARY military ORDERS were to gather MALE recruits, but he was ALSO ORDERED to gather FEMALE recruits? I don't think so. He probably recruited her at his own discretion. Would you be justified in suggesting that those orders imply he should visit EVERY city in the country where there are potential male recruits? Certainly not, but he should go to the major cities. If he says there are other recruits he needs to gather that aren't in that group he's with should you assume he means other MALE recruits in other parts of the country or that he means FEMALE recruits in the same area that he's speaking? The answer should be obvious to you, Trout, that he would likely mean other MALES in other places.

TROUT:
A recruiter given specific military orders wouldn't go beyond the letter of the law in signing recruits. So by signing up one female recruit he would be breaking the rule he was given at the time his orders were issued.


JOHN MORMON:
They might go beyond the letter of the command if they ranked high enough.

http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/femvets5.html

CAPT BARB:
Congresswoman Rogers introduced a bill on May 28 th, 1941, to establish a Women's Army Auxiliary Corps for service with the Army of the United States. By virtue of its being an auxiliary corps there was no hint of full military status for women.

The bill was dissected, bisected, stalled, lost, amended, sandbagged, and all but trashed until General George C. Marshall took an interest.

While several government departments cooperated, the Bureau of the Budget continued to stall in spite of pressure from Mrs. Roosevelt, General Marshall and other interested parties and groups. By late November of 1941 there was still no definitive action. At this point General Marshall literally ordered the War Department to create a womens corps. An incident in the Pacific reinforced this order.


JOHN MORMON:
Apparently, Gen. Marshall was not acting under direct orders of the President or in obedience to a law of Congress on that issue. Maybe Jesus did a similar thing.

TROUT:
But by Jesus gathering gentile sheep He wasn't breaking a rule that He had been given.


JOHN MORMON:
It's not that Jesus was ordered specifically NOT to gather the Gentiles, but He was specifically ordered TO gather the Israelites. He apparently went beyond His orders when He "gathered" a few non Israelites. He's Jesus, so He could do that if He wanted to.

JOHN MORMON:
No He doesn't, Trout. Jesus did some personal gathering while He was on Earth, but Jesus has representatives do most of the gathering since then. Jesus now personally sits on a throne up in heaven to the right of the Father. You should know that.

TROUT:
Jhn 10:27
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:


In order to follow Christ we must hear and heed His voice.


JOHN MORMON:
But the sheep He was to personally gather, who were supposed to personally hear His voice were ISRAELITES. The Gentiles would have to "hear His voice" through the instrumentality of others and through the Holy Ghost.

John Powell

[Sparko]

In a recent discussion I was in with an LDS friend of mine, I was issued a challenge, the challenge involved a verse from the Book of Mormon (Moroni 10:4) which goes like this;

"And when ye shall receive these things (the Book of Mormon), I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."

In essence my friend was telling me to ask God whether or not the Book of Mormon was indeed what it claimed to be, by using a claim that the book itself makes.

But for me to use the Book of Mormon promise, that would mean that I already trusted the book enough to believe that the promise in it was true. Sound good? I don't think so either.

Before the promise can be applied, it must be tested. And the Book of Mormon and the other LDS scriptures must be excluded from the test.

One option would be to use the Bible to test the test. (1Th 5:21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.) And to my recollection, nowhere in the Bible are we told to pray to find out if the words contained in the Bible are true. (Don't even try to mis-apply James 1:5)

Another thing that troubles me with the Book of Mormon promise is the fact that it questions my sincerity and intent, "if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent,". In other words, if you don't receive the answer that the Book of Mormon is indeed the Word of God then you either weren't sincere enough or you had wrong intentions. So it would seem that there is only one correct answer from the get go.

So when I talk with my friend again, I'm going to tell him that I must decline his invitation to pray about the Book of Mormon.

Because the Book of Mormon is either true or it's false completely apart from what answer I may receive in prayer.

yup.

[One Bad Pig]

Digging for buried treasure again?

[Sparko]

yup

[OtherCheek]

In a recent discussion I was in with an LDS friend of mine, I was issued a challenge, the challenge involved a verse from the Book of Mormon (Moroni 10:4) which goes like this;

"And when ye shall receive these things (the Book of Mormon), I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."

In essence my friend was telling me to ask God whether or not the Book of Mormon was indeed what it claimed to be, by using a claim that the book itself makes.

But for me to use the Book of Mormon promise, that would mean that I already trusted the book enough to believe that the promise in it was true. Sound good? I don't think so either.

Before the promise can be applied, it must be tested. And the Book of Mormon and the other LDS scriptures must be excluded from the test.

One option would be to use the Bible to test the test. (1Th 5:21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.) And to my recollection, nowhere in the Bible are we told to pray to find out if the words contained in the Bible are true. (Don't even try to mis-apply James 1:5)

Another thing that troubles me with the Book of Mormon promise is the fact that it questions my sincerity and intent, "if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent,". In other words, if you don't receive the answer that the Book of Mormon is indeed the Word of God then you either weren't sincere enough or you had wrong intentions. So it would seem that there is only one correct answer from the get go.

So when I talk with my friend again, I'm going to tell him that I must decline his invitation to pray about the Book of Mormon.

Because the Book of Mormon is either true or it's false completely apart from what answer I may receive in prayer.

And now, my beloved brethren, I perceive that ye ponder still in your hearts; and it grieveth me that I must speak concerning this thing. For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must cpray; for the devil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray. (2 Ne 32:8)

I've always been curious why our critics seem to preach: "Whatever you do, don't pray."

[Sparko]

And now, my beloved brethren, I perceive that ye ponder still in your hearts; and it grieveth me that I must speak concerning this thing. For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must cpray; for the devil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray. (2 Ne 32:8)

I've always been curious why our critics seem to preach: "Whatever you do, don't pray."


Have you prayed to see if the Koran is true? have you prayed to see if Wicca is true?

why not?

[JAYMZ]

And now, my beloved brethren, I perceive that ye ponder still in your hearts; and it grieveth me that I must speak concerning this thing. For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must cpray; for the devil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray. (2 Ne 32:8)

I've always been curious why our critics seem to preach: "Whatever you do, don't pray."
I have honestly never prayed about the bible, and yet, I still believe it is the word of God.

You dont need a esoteric experience to confirm truth.

[Shadow Phoenix]

I wonder if I should pray to see if it's okay for me to commit adultery or not.

[OtherCheek]

I have honestly never prayed about the bible, and yet, I still believe it is the word of God.

You dont need a esoteric experience to confirm truth.

Confirming truth is what this particular invitation is all about.

But some people never get far enough to recognize spiritual truth when they hear it, and so naturally, prayer for confirmation, will never come into the equation.

What do you pray about when you do pray?

[Shadow Phoenix]

Confirming truth is what this particular invitation is all about.

But some people never get far enough to recognize spiritual truth when they hear it, and so naturally, prayer for confirmation, will never come into the equation.

What do you pray about when you do pray?

Thanksgiving. I know there are things in my life I'm definitely giving thanks for.

Confession.

Intercession.

Praise.

Then requests. Now I do pray for wisdom and knowledge, but I know I have to work also. I pray also for myself to be a good and godly man. I have a prayer journal of people that I pray for and go through every night.

[wonbyone]

Jaymz brought up a good point! How many of the mormons here have honestly prayed if the Bible is true or not? Also why didn't joseph smith give the same requirements(Burning of the Bosom) to confirm the Bible as he did the bom?

[JAYMZ]

Confirming truth is what this particular invitation is all about.

But some people never get far enough to recognize spiritual truth when they hear it, and so naturally, prayer for confirmation, will never come into the equation.

What do you pray about when you do pray?
Was is it necessary for the BoM and not the bible ?

In prayer I praise God, thank God for all blessings, pray for my unsaved friends and family, ask to be led and guided by The Holy Spirit, ask for wisdom, ask that the light of Christ will shine in my life and bring glory to God, pray for people on Tweb and other requests.

[Sparko]

so OC, have you prayed earnestly to see if the Koran is true?

why not?

[JAYMZ]

Jaymz brought up a good point! How many of the mormons here have honestly prayed if the Bible is true or not? Also why didn't joseph smith give the same requirements(Burning of the Bosom) to confirm the Bible as he did the bom?
Oh one, your using logic and doesnt sit too well with cultic ideas.:teeth:

[OtherCheek]

Was is it necessary for the BoM and not the bible ?

I would say:
Most Christians today were born Christian--and were taught by tradition and culture to believe in the Bible--at least on a historical, archeological, argumentative level.

But having a personal witness that Jesus is who he says he is, and that the Bible contains the words of salvation, cannot come through tradition and culture. It must be obtained from God on a personal level.

A personal testimony of Jesus Christ on a spiritual level (not a material, historical, or archeological level) must come through spiritual means.


In prayer I praise God, thank God for all blessings, pray for my unsaved friends and family, ask to be led and guided by The Holy Spirit, ask for wisdom, ask that the light of Christ will shine in my life and bring glory to God, pray for people on Tweb and other requests.

I am glad you pray to be led and guided by The Holy Spirit. Such is the prayer regarding confirmation that the Book of Mormon is true.

[Shadow Phoenix]

But having a personal witness that Jesus is who he says he is, and that the Bible contains the words of salvation, cannot come through tradition and culture.

Why? It seems like several Christians throughout the centuries believed Jesus is who he said he was based on Scripture without having to pray to see if the Bible was the Word of God.





I am glad you pray to be led and guided by The Holy Spirit. Such is the prayer regarding confirmation that the Book of Mormon is true.

Oh every time I pray about the BOM, I find something else wrong with it. Yes. I suppose God is leading me to truth.

[nrajeff]

Have you prayed to see if the Koran is true? have you prayed to see if Wicca is true?

why not?

---I have never prayed to see if Trinitarianism or TULIP are true, either. Yet somehow, I just get the feeling that they have problems, even without praying about it. :teeth: But if I was "on the fence" about them, and my own studies were ineffective at helping me make up my mind on them, asking God to give me the wisdom and knowledge to make a correct decision regarding them seems like a GREAT idea--. an idea that I'd be really foolish to arrogantly dismiss.

[Sparko]

---I have never prayed to see if Trinitarianism or TULIP are true, either. Yet somehow, I just get the feeling that they have problems, even without praying about it. :teeth: But if I was "on the fence" about them, and my own studies were ineffective at helping me make up my mind on them, asking God to give me the wisdom and knowledge to make a correct decision regarding them seems like a GREAT idea--. an idea that I'd be really foolish to arrogantly dismiss.

Why then you must have the spirit of the devil in you, according to OC, because only the devil stops you from praying! You are leaning on your own INTELLECT to study and decide if they are true or not without even praying about it! You are some sort of LDS heathen Jeff!

Perhaps OC will pray for you.

But thanks for answering my question. I hope OC has the guts to answer me too.

[Sparko]

OC, why not pray THIS prayer:

"Heavenly Father, God of Abraham, Moses and Jacob, I want to know and worship the true God. I believe in the Book of Mormon, but if it is not the truth, then I want you to reveal that to me and show me the real you and the truth about who you really are. Help me and show yourself to me."

and then watch for actual answers, not a burning in the bosom. Pay attention to what God shows you through others, even us Christians. Use your mind as well as your heart. Read the bible, not just as a sidenote to the book of Mormon but as a primary source. Read what is actually written there and take what it says as what it says instead of trying to make it mean what the BoM says.

[jo7241974]

Shadow Phoenix;2836392]Why? It seems like several Christians throughout the centuries believed Jesus is who he said he was based on Scripture without having to pray to see if the Bible was the Word of God.

SP aka AP (you and Toodles are sooooo cute!)

I am curious. OC also said this:

A personal testimony of Jesus Christ on a spiritual level (not a material, historical, or archeological level) must come through spiritual means.

I believe he said that to further qualify the part of his post which you responded to. Why did you pad his question with "having to pray to see if the Bible was the Word of God"?

Also, are you saying the Christians you are referring to received their witness about Jesus solely from Scripture?

Oh every time I pray about the BOM, I find something else wrong with it. Yes. I suppose God is leading me to truth.

Have you prayed about your preterist belief?

[jo7241974]

Jaymz brought up a good point! How many of the mormons here have honestly prayed if the Bible is true or not? Also why didn't joseph smith give the same requirements(Burning of the Bosom) to confirm the Bible as he did the bom?

Joseph Smith was teaching people who were already Christians. Therefore, they already believed that the Bible was the Word of God.

[jo7241974]

OC, why not pray THIS prayer:

"Heavenly Father, God of Abraham, Moses and Jacob, I want to know and worship the true God. I believe in the Book of Mormon, but if it is not the truth, then I want you to reveal that to me and show me the real you and the truth about who you really are. Help me and show yourself to me."

and then watch for actual answers, not a burning in the bosom. Pay attention to what God shows you through others, even us Christians. Use your mind as well as your heart. Read the bible, not just as a sidenote to the book of Mormon but as a primary source. Read what is actually written there and take what it says as what it says instead of trying to make it mean what the BoM says.

Your ignorance about the Church's love and study of the Holy Bible makes it blatantly clear that your claim to know and understand LDS teachings is, at best, still seriously flawed. Sadly, it is your choice to remain in that state, as you find great joy in misleading yourself and others. So be it.

[Sparko]

Your ignorance about the Church's love and study of the Holy Bible makes it blatantly clear that your claim to know and understand LDS teachings is, at best, still seriously flawed. Sadly, it is your choice to remain in that state, as you find great joy in misleading yourself and others. So be it.

what? I asked you to pray a sincere prayer and you refuse and get angry with me?

Why Jo? OC says the devil makes you not want to pray. Is that true?

Have you prayed with a sincere heart to see if the Koran is true? How about all other holy books? Have you prayed over each of them after reading them? Have you even read the Koran or any other Holy Book?

I am betting the answer is no.

[wonbyone]

Joseph Smith was teaching people who were already Christians. Therefore, they already believed that the Bible was the Word of God.

That doesn't answer the question. When you guys are trying to convert let's say an atheist why do mormons tell them to only pray about the bom and not the Bible?

[Shadow Phoenix]

SP aka AP (you and Toodles are sooooo cute!)

I assure you the Princess is far cuter than I am.

I am curious. OC also said this:



I believe he said that to further qualify the part of his post which you responded to. Why did you pad his question with "having to pray to see if the Bible was the Word of God"?

Because that was the point being raised. People knew the Bible was the Word of God because it was proven not by a subjective emotion, but in the power of the gospel changing lives and the knowledge that Jesus rose from the dead. They actually thought about these things.

Also, are you saying the Christians you are referring to received their witness about Jesus solely from Scripture?

They could have, but most didn't. Christians in the past were very well educated in all fields. John Wesley, for instance, spoke of how the Christian should know geometry, biology, astronomy, languages, literature, etc. That's also why many great founders in science were Christians. They had their minds and hearts both engaged. Their experience lined up with the Scripture. They didn't interpret Scripture by their experience but interpreted experience by Scripture.



Have you prayed about your preterist belief?

I pray for wisdom and knowledge. I don't believe God tells us to pray so that he can tell us the answers. Part of the joy of Christianity is studying to find those answers and using the mind God gave us. The reason I am convinced of Preterism is because I am convinced I see it in the Scriptures. Could I be wrong? Of course. The way to show that however is by going to those Scriptures and showing from Scripture. It is not my claiming to be a pope.

[jo7241974]

Shadow Phoenix;2836886]I assure you the Princess is far cuter than I am.


awww - I am sure you are treating her well. She more than deserves it! God bless you both.

Because that was the point being raised. People knew the Bible was the Word of God because it was proven not by a subjective emotion, but in the power of the gospel changing lives and the knowledge that Jesus rose from the dead. They actually thought about these things.

I believe people knew the Bible was the Word of God (and it is still the same today) because the Holy Spirit has born witness to them that Jesus is the Christ. The Bible can point people to God, but the Holy Spirit will not witness to them until they open the door of faith. That is when the Bible becomes the Word of God to the person reading it. For some the door of faith is easily opened. For others, they will test the Bible and compare it to what they know about the world. If they are sincerely seeking to find out if God really exists, they may feel the need to study it a lot before they confess their faith. For both of these types of individuals, however, it is still the Holy Spirit who witnesses to them. Until that witness, their world knowledge and their testing only pointed to them that a God really could exist. Once the Holy Spirit confirms their faith IS placed in Jesus Christ as described in the Bible, all of the other evidences become proof of God's existence. That is why an atheist can read and study the very same book. The same evidences are there in black and white. Nothing is different about the book titled the Bible versus the Word of God titled the Bible. The difference between a Christian and an atheist is that the Holy Spirit has witnessed to the Christian who confessed their faith; the Bible becomes the Word of God. The atheist does not have faith; therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot witness to them; the Bible remains a book.

They could have, but most didn't. Christians in the past were very well educated in all fields. John Wesley, for instance, spoke of how the Christian should know geometry, biology, astronomy, languages, literature, etc. That's also why many great founders in science were Christians. They had their minds and hearts both engaged. Their experience lined up with the Scripture. They didn't interpret Scripture by their experience but interpreted experience by Scripture.

There is an error of thought that exists in that people think the LDS do not use their brains and reasoning powers when investigating the Church. For those who are born into the Church, their learning of all knowledge, be it secular or spiritual, is done while they are already a member of the Church. Of course, this is stating the obvious; but do not think for a moment that their education about the secular world is any different from non-LDS. They live in the same world, they go to the same schools, they listen to the same news, they read the same newspapers, the same books. For those who are introduced to the Church, the investigating is usually much more intense than anyone born into it may do. It took me several months - I poked at it with a sharp stick - I prayerfully studied both the Bible and the Book of Mormon long before I ever prayed to know if the Book of Mormon was true. My desire to know the truth was very strong. I did not desire that the Book of Mormon be true. My desire was to know truth. Do not think for one moment that my education growing up non-LDS was not drawn upon to help me consider what I was being taught by the missionaries.

It is because I was familiar with the Holy Spirit as a Lutheran, that I was able to recognize it was the Holy Spirit who witnessed to me that the Book of Mormon was true.

I pray for wisdom and knowledge. I don't believe God tells us to pray so that he can tell us the answers. Part of the joy of Christianity is studying to find those answers and using the mind God gave us. The reason I am convinced of Preterism is because I am convinced I see it in the Scriptures. Could I be wrong? Of course. The way to show that however is by going to those Scriptures and showing from Scripture. It is not my claiming to be a pope.

I also pray for wisdom and knowledge. There have only been a few instances in my life where I have saught a very specific answer to a very specific question. One of them was when I prayed about the Book of Mormon.

I have never needed to pray to find out if the Bible was true. Since it was the book titled the Bible that talked about Jesus (I had no Book of Mormon to tell me about Him), I confessed my faith in Jesus because the Bible told me that is what I should do to find out for myself. Once I confessed my faith, the Holy Spirit witnessed to me the Truth. The Bible became the Word of God to me. It was not necessary to now pray about the book as well. The Book of Mormon, as a second witness of Jesus Christ is usually the second book of Scripture people read. Although, I have heard testimonies of individuals who read the Book of Mormon first who were led to confess their faith in Jesus Christ.

It is only logical, therefore, to pray about the second book which testifies of Christ whom you already believe in. If the Bible was first, then one would need to pray about the Book of Mormon. If the Book of Mormon was first, then one would need to pray about the Bible.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

That doesn't answer the question. When you guys are trying to convert let's say an atheist why do mormons tell them to only pray about the bom and not the Bible?

See post #92.

[Shadow Phoenix]

awww - I am sure you are treating her well. She more than deserves it! God bless you both.

Only the best. I am a gentlemen.



I believe people knew the Bible was the Word of God (and it is still the same today) because the Holy Spirit has born witness to them that Jesus is the Christ.

Which means what? Now I agree it happens, but I do not believe it happens the way you think it does.

The Bible can point people to God, but the Holy Spirit will not witness to them until they open the door of faith.

No problem there.

That is when the Bible becomes the Word of God to the person reading it.

Problem. The person can realize the Bible is the Word of God, but it cannot become that. It simply is the Word of God regardless of what men believe. By the way, can God error?

For some the door of faith is easily opened. For others, they will test the Bible and compare it to what they know about the world. If they are sincerely seeking to find out if God really exists, they may feel the need to study it a lot before they confess their faith. For both of these types of individuals, however, it is still the Holy Spirit who witnesses to them.

No problem there. I believe the Holy Spirit can use many means to get someone to truth.

Until that witness, their world knowledge and their testing only pointed to them that a God really could exist. Once the Holy Spirit confirms their faith IS placed in Jesus Christ as described in the Bible, all of the other evidences become proof of God's existence. That is why an atheist can read and study the very same book. The same evidences are there in black and white. Nothing is different about the book titled the Bible versus the Word of God titled the Bible. The difference between a Christian and an atheist is that the Holy Spirit has witnessed to the Christian who confessed their faith; the Bible becomes the Word of God. The atheist does not have faith; therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot witness to them; the Bible remains a book.

I believe the Holy Spirit can witness. They just resist that witness. I also believe the main method has been by testing and not by praying to see if it is true. That is not the method advocated in Scripture.



There is an error of thought that exists in that people think the LDS do not use their brains and reasoning powers when investigating the Church. For those who are born into the Church, their learning of all knowledge, be it secular or spiritual, is done while they are already a member of the Church. Of course, this is stating the obvious; but do not think for a moment that their education about the secular world is any different from non-LDS. They live in the same world, they go to the same schools, they listen to the same news, they read the same newspapers, the same books. For those who are introduced to the Church, the investigating is usually much more intense than anyone born into it may do. It took me several months - I poked at it with a sharp stick - I prayerfully studied both the Bible and the Book of Mormon long before I ever prayed to know if the Book of Mormon was true. My desire to know the truth was very strong. I did not desire that the Book of Mormon be true. My desire was to know truth. Do not think for one moment that my education growing up non-LDS was not drawn upon to help me consider what I was being taught by the missionaries.

But you see, my problem is that it seems there is a different standard given that is not given to other claims. For this, it's a burning in the bosom. I am sorry, but I do not want to stake eternity on if I have a burning in my bosom.

It is because I was familiar with the Holy Spirit as a Lutheran, that I was able to recognize it was the Holy Spirit who witnessed to me that the Book of Mormon was true.

And that would be known how?



I also pray for wisdom and knowledge. There have only been a few instances in my life where I have saught a very specific answer to a very specific question. One of them was when I prayed about the Book of Mormon.

And I prayed and only got shown more problems. Is God getting his message confused?

I have never needed to pray to find out if the Bible was true. Since it was the book titled the Bible that talked about Jesus (I had no Book of Mormon to tell me about Him), I confessed my faith in Jesus because the Bible told me that is what I should do to find out for myself.

Verse please?

Once I confessed my faith, the Holy Spirit witnessed to me the Truth. The Bible became the Word of God to me.

Barth and Brunner and the other neo-orthodox are pleased.

It was not necessary to now pray about the book as well. The Book of Mormon, as a second witness of Jesus Christ is usually the second book of Scripture people read. Although, I have heard testimonies of individuals who read the Book of Mormon first who were led to confess their faith in Jesus Christ.

Supposed book of Scripture and actually, it was the Koran for me first.

It is only logical, therefore, to pray about the second book which testifies of Christ whom you already believe in. If the Bible was first, then one would need to pray about the Book of Mormon. If the Book of Mormon was first, then one would need to pray about the Bible.

God bless,

jo

I do not see how the logic follows at all.

[wonbyone]

See post #92.

I read it Jo and it still doesn't seem to answer the Question.
If your were witnessing to an atheist who says that both the bom and the Bible are bogus why wouldn't you tell them to pray about the Bible as well as the bom?
Is there an official instruction to pray about the authenticity of the Bible?

[jo7241974]

Shadow Phoenix;2837054]
Which means what? Now I agree it happens, but I do not believe it happens the way you think it does.

Meaning it is not Scripture that convinces them that Jesus is the Christ. If it IS only scripture that is their witness, they have built their faith on sand. The Holy Spirit's power is far greater than the written word. Would you agree that having God actually touch and teach your spirit is more powerful than words? Being witnessed to by the Holy Spirit brings faith built upon a rock solid foundation. Jesus even taught us that the Holy Spirit's power to touch and teach and convince our spirit that Jesus is the Christ is more powerful than Jesus' own ability to convince people, even though Jesus was with them in the flesh.

Problem. The person can realize the Bible is the Word of God, but it cannot become that. It simply is the Word of God regardless of what men believe. By the way, can God error?

On one level I agree - but that is because I believe in Jesus Christ. To those who do not believe in Jesus Christ, the Bible will always be words in a book - because that is their reality. You are arguing semantics here. Your reality and my reality recognize the Bible to be the Word of God. For unbelievers the Bible is just another book.

No, God cannot error. People, however, error all of the time. Even in matters concerning God. Even devoted followers of Jesus erred - no one is incapable of erring in matters concerning God; not even me, and not even you.

No problem there. I believe the Holy Spirit can use many means to get someone to truth.

I agree. I also believe that the closer we get to truth the harder the adversary tries to stop us.

I believe the Holy Spirit can witness. They just resist that witness. I also believe the main method has been by testing and not by praying to see if it is true. That is not the method advocated in Scripture.

Confessing our faith is in itself a test. This opens the door for the Holy Spirit to enter and communicate with your spirit. The Bible does teach us to pray - even how to pray and in what manner. The Holy Spirit, however, is not picky and will take advantage of whatever method is used by someone who is seeking the truth about Jesus. The person just needs to open the door, so to speak.

But you see, my problem is that it seems there is a different standard given that is not given to other claims. For this, it's a burning in the bosom. I am sorry, but I do not want to stake eternity on if I have a burning in my bosom.

That is merely a way to try to describe what happens, to describe that the Holy Spirit has witnessed to you....whether it is concerning some spiritual epiphany when something you have been studying suddenly makes sense because your mind's eyes were opened momentarily to the kingdom of God; or if you have the sudden impression to change lanes and moments later the person you were driving behind in the lane you left has a tire blow out; or if you are impressed to stop and see a friend you have not talked to in ages and you find they are in a crisis you can help support them through. The experiencing of the Holy Spirit is described in a way that members of the Church can readily identify with and know that is what the person is telling you. For many there really is a warmth - or a feeling of actual peace and calm that comes over you.

Your eternity does not begin or end with a witness from the Holy Spirit. It is up to each of us what we are going to do about it which helps define us. Jesus' atonement saves us from our sins if we accept Him as our Savior. Having the added knowledge that He has restored His Church and that we can worship Him from within His Church, rather than staying in a church which has less truth available, is a blessing we can either accept or reject. Being able to avail ourselves of His Holy Priesthood which has been restored brings blessings into our lives which you cannot have imagined.

And that would be known how?

Each person has their own relationship with and experiencing of the Holy Spirit. Whatever each of us needs and whatever each of us is ready for is what the Holy Spirit will teach us. Once we believe that Jesus is the Christ, and we have accepted Him as our Savior, the Holy Spirit's initial role of witness for Heavenly Father and for Jesus Christ, then becomes an ongoing influence in our lives where we continue to grow in our understanding of the kingdom of God. This is well taught by Paul who goes on to say that the Holy Spirit teaches us things that are discernable only to our Spirit - and are not understood by man. It is because man, who considers himself wise, who does not understand those whose lives are directed by the Holy Spirit, will call them foolish. Eventually, however, the wise man will be exposed as the one who is foolish; the ones called foolish will become wise----because their wisdom comes from God; not from man.

And I prayed and only got shown more problems. Is God getting his message confused?

Not at all. There is a reception problem.

Verse please?

Really? Does the Bible not teach us to believe in Jesus? To have faith in Jesus? The entire Bible points us to Him.

Supposed book of Scripture and actually, it was the Koran for me first.

I would enjoy hearing your history with religion and how you found Jesus.

I do not see how the logic follows at all.

Perhaps you just don't want to. Others saw the logic.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

I read it Jo and it still doesn't seem to answer the Question.
If your were witnessing to an atheist who says that both the bom and the Bible are bogus why wouldn't you tell them to pray about the Bible as well as the bom?
Is there an official instruction to pray about the authenticity of the Bible?

I suppose we could ask an atheist to pray about the Bible and/or the Book of Mormon. Whatever method we could influence them to use in order to open the door to faith, thereby allowing the Holy Spirit access to their spirit, would be wonderful.

If you have never accepted Jesus as your Savior, how are you going to accept ANY scripture as actually being scripture? Both books teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Whichever book was the one which influenced you to want to believe in Jesus will not need any confirmation to be accepted as the Word of God. When the Holy Spirit witnesses to you that Jesus is the Christ, and it was the Bible you were reading when you decided to test your faith, the knowledge you receive from the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus, automatically convinces you that the Bible is the Word of God. It's not even a question that comes to your mind.

However, once you have accepted Jesus, whether through the influence of the Bible, or through the influence of the BoM, you are now faced with two books. One of them you already accept as the Word of God. Therefore, reason would, at the very least, suggest that you pray about the second book in order to find out if it is what it claims to be. Praying about the second book is not an exercise to question your faith in Jesus Christ. It is an exercise to try to discover if people on another part of the earth also had the chance to learn about Jesus Christ.

Since most of the people who investigate the Church are already Christian, it is not necessary to pray about the Bible. If missionaries come upon people who are not Christian, who have not rejected the Bible because they have never heard about it, the missionaries will first teach them about the Book of Mormon. If the people come to believe in Jesus and accept Him as their Savior, I do not see how they would doubt the Bible. In the course of the investigating, the missionaries would also have taught them that the Bible is also the Word of God. They also would have been taught that the D&C and Pearl of Great Price are also scripture.

It depends on who is being taught and how much they already know about Jesus Christ which would determine their need to pray about any additional scripture which is being presented to them.

No, there is no official instruction about praying about the Bible because it most likely would have already been accepted as the Word of God at the time they came to Christ.

God bless,

jo

[OtherCheek]

I suppose we could ask an atheist to pray about the Bible and/or the Book of Mormon. Whatever method we could influence them to use in order to open the door to faith, thereby allowing the Holy Spirit access to their spirit, would be wonderful.

If you have never accepted Jesus as your Savior, how are you going to accept ANY scripture as actually being scripture? Both books teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Whichever book was the one which influenced you to want to believe in Jesus will not need any confirmation to be accepted as the Word of God. When the Holy Spirit witnesses to you that Jesus is the Christ, and it was the Bible you were reading when you decided to test your faith, the knowledge you receive from the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus, automatically convinces you that the Bible is the Word of God. It's not even a question that comes to your mind.

However, once you have accepted Jesus, whether through the influence of the Bible, or through the influence of the BoM, you are now faced with two books. One of them you already accept as the Word of God. Therefore, reason would, at the very least, suggest that you pray about the second book in order to find out if it is what it claims to be. Praying about the second book is not an exercise to question your faith in Jesus Christ. It is an exercise to try to discover if people on another part of the earth also had the chance to learn about Jesus Christ.

Since most of the people who investigate the Church are already Christian, it is not necessary to pray about the Bible. If missionaries come upon people who are not Christian, who have not rejected the Bible because they have never heard about it, the missionaries will first teach them about the Book of Mormon. If the people come to believe in Jesus and accept Him as their Savior, I do not see how they would doubt the Bible. In the course of the investigating, the missionaries would also have taught them that the Bible is also the Word of God. They also would have been taught that the D&C and Pearl of Great Price are also scripture.

It depends on who is being taught and how much they already know about Jesus Christ which would determine their need to pray about any additional scripture which is being presented to them.

No, there is no official instruction about praying about the Bible because it most likely would have already been accepted as the Word of God at the time they came to Christ.

God bless,

jo

Jo, this makes a lot of sense, as I see it.

Thanks.

[Sparko]

Frank, please don't ignore my questions.

Do you think that the book of Mormon is truly a new revelation of Jesus Christ?

If not, then did Joseph Smith make it up from his imagination, or was he influenced by some darker force to create a false book?

[wonbyone]

I suppose we could ask an atheist to pray about the Bible and/or the Book of Mormon. Whatever method we could influence them to use in order to open the door to faith, thereby allowing the Holy Spirit access to their spirit, would be wonderful.

If you have never accepted Jesus as your Savior, how are you going to accept ANY scripture as actually being scripture? Both books teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Whichever book was the one which influenced you to want to believe in Jesus will not need any confirmation to be accepted as the Word of God. When the Holy Spirit witnesses to you that Jesus is the Christ, and it was the Bible you were reading when you decided to test your faith, the knowledge you receive from the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus, automatically convinces you that the Bible is the Word of God. It's not even a question that comes to your mind.

However, once you have accepted Jesus, whether through the influence of the Bible, or through the influence of the BoM, you are now faced with two books. One of them you already accept as the Word of God. Therefore, reason would, at the very least, suggest that you pray about the second book in order to find out if it is what it claims to be. Praying about the second book is not an exercise to question your faith in Jesus Christ. It is an exercise to try to discover if people on another part of the earth also had the chance to learn about Jesus Christ.

Since most of the people who investigate the Church are already Christian, it is not necessary to pray about the Bible. If missionaries come upon people who are not Christian, who have not rejected the Bible because they have never heard about it, the missionaries will first teach them about the Book of Mormon. If the people come to believe in Jesus and accept Him as their Savior, I do not see how they would doubt the Bible. In the course of the investigating, the missionaries would also have taught them that the Bible is also the Word of God. They also would have been taught that the D&C and Pearl of Great Price are also scripture.

It depends on who is being taught and how much they already know about Jesus Christ which would determine their need to pray about any additional scripture which is being presented to them.

No, there is no official instruction about praying about the Bible because it most likely would have already been accepted as the Word of God at the time they came to Christ.

God bless,

jo

Thanks for the response. I have talked to many lds missionaries who didn't know that I was a Christian and not once was I ever told that I should pray about the Bible but only about the bom.

[Shadow Phoenix]

Meaning it is not Scripture that convinces them that Jesus is the Christ. If it IS only scripture that is their witness, they have built their faith on sand.

2 Peter 1:16-21 says the opposite. Peter spoke of seeing the Transfiguration, but he said the more important aspect is that the Word of the prophets is proven certain and he pointed people to that Word. I consider a faith built on Scripture to be quite strong and I consider it a horrible denigration of Scripture to say that it is a foundation of sand.

The Holy Spirit's power is far greater than the written word. Would you agree that having God actually touch and teach your spirit is more powerful than words?

If it happened, yes, but is that to be normative today?

Being witnessed to by the Holy Spirit brings faith built upon a rock solid foundation.

And again I ask, how do you know it's the Holy Spirit, especially since we know of him from Scripture, the foundation of sand.

Jesus even taught us that the Holy Spirit's power to touch and teach and convince our spirit that Jesus is the Christ is more powerful than Jesus' own ability to convince people, even though Jesus was with them in the flesh.

Verse?



On one level I agree - but that is because I believe in Jesus Christ. To those who do not believe in Jesus Christ, the Bible will always be words in a book - because that is their reality. You are arguing semantics here. Your reality and my reality recognize the Bible to be the Word of God. For unbelievers the Bible is just another book.

I am not arguing about what we recognize but what the thing in itself is.

No, God cannot error. People, however, error all of the time. Even in matters concerning God. Even devoted followers of Jesus erred - no one is incapable of erring in matters concerning God; not even me, and not even you.

But if God cannot error and the Bible is the Word of God, then it would follow that the Word of God cannot error.



I agree. I also believe that the closer we get to truth the harder the adversary tries to stop us.

Then I'd include a good argument and good evidence as tools the Spirit uses.



Confessing our faith is in itself a test. This opens the door for the Holy Spirit to enter and communicate with your spirit. The Bible does teach us to pray - even how to pray and in what manner. The Holy Spirit, however, is not picky and will take advantage of whatever method is used by someone who is seeking the truth about Jesus. The person just needs to open the door, so to speak.

I was not told where this method is advocated or where Scripture justifies it.



That is merely a way to try to describe what happens, to describe that the Holy Spirit has witnessed to you....whether it is concerning some spiritual epiphany when something you have been studying suddenly makes sense because your mind's eyes were opened momentarily to the kingdom of God; or if you have the sudden impression to change lanes and moments later the person you were driving behind in the lane you left has a tire blow out; or if you are impressed to stop and see a friend you have not talked to in ages and you find they are in a crisis you can help support them through. The experiencing of the Holy Spirit is described in a way that members of the Church can readily identify with and know that is what the person is telling you. For many there really is a warmth - or a feeling of actual peace and calm that comes over you.

But again, this is simply using your experience to justify your experience. I do not see the basis. My faith is based on a historical fact. He is risen. The tomb was found empty. I believe that because I believe a study of history can prove that happened and validate the NT. I do not believe a study of history can validate the BOM.

Your eternity does not begin or end with a witness from the Holy Spirit. It is up to each of us what we are going to do about it which helps define us. Jesus' atonement saves us from our sins if we accept Him as our Savior. Having the added knowledge that He has restored His Church and that we can worship Him from within His Church, rather than staying in a church which has less truth available, is a blessing we can either accept or reject. Being able to avail ourselves of His Holy Priesthood which has been restored brings blessings into our lives which you cannot have imagined.

First off, I have never been shown when the church apostasized and I find such a notion a direct contradiction of Jesus's words in Matthew 16 that the gates of Hell would not stand against the church. Also, I do avail of his holy Priesthood. Jesus is my high priest and he is the only priest that there is. There can be no others. No one can hold a Melchizedek priesthood besides Jesus Christ.



Each person has their own relationship with and experiencing of the Holy Spirit. Whatever each of us needs and whatever each of us is ready for is what the Holy Spirit will teach us. Once we believe that Jesus is the Christ, and we have accepted Him as our Savior, the Holy Spirit's initial role of witness for Heavenly Father and for Jesus Christ, then becomes an ongoing influence in our lives where we continue to grow in our understanding of the kingdom of God. This is well taught by Paul who goes on to say that the Holy Spirit teaches us things that are discernable only to our Spirit - and are not understood by man. It is because man, who considers himself wise, who does not understand those whose lives are directed by the Holy Spirit, will call them foolish. Eventually, however, the wise man will be exposed as the one who is foolish; the ones called foolish will become wise----because their wisdom comes from God; not from man.

In all of this, I do not see an answer to the question.



Not at all. There is a reception problem.

And the problem is obviously me. How wonderful. Why is it that when the test fails, it's not the fault of the test but the person trying, but when it succeeds, that proves the test is true. It's hardly a valid way of proving the test if you throw out every example that works against it.



Really? Does the Bible not teach us to believe in Jesus? To have faith in Jesus? The entire Bible points us to Him.

I did not ask where the Bible tells us to put faith in Jesus but where the Bible says to put faith in Jesus to find out if he is true.



I would enjoy hearing your history with religion and how you found Jesus.

I read things I disagree with many times. I read the Koran so I would better understand Islam. I have read Mormon Scriptures and now better understand Mormonism. I still say both are false. The faith I grew up with has proven to be true to every test I've put it to.



Perhaps you just don't want to. Others saw the logic.

God bless,

jo

No. I can see the logical course of an argument and not agree with the argument. Again, you assume the problem must be with me. The truth is I saw no logical connection. It's a massive non sequitur.

[jo7241974]

Shadow Phoenix;2837668]2 Peter 1:16-21 says the opposite. Peter spoke of seeing the Transfiguration, but he said the more important aspect is that the Word of the prophets is proven certain and he pointed people to that Word. I consider a faith built on Scripture to be quite strong and I consider it a horrible denigration of Scripture to say that it is a foundation of sand.

Peter said he was present at the Transfiguration and heard Heavenly Father speak from Heaven, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased". He then points to the prophecy of old time which has now been fulfilled. IOW Jesus Christ is who the prophets said would come. That's why he said we now have a more sure prophecy; because Heavenly Father himself confirmed who Jesus was to those who witnessed the Transfiguration.

He goes on to say: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

When the Holy Spirit witnesses to you, you receive a solid foundation to build your faith upon. The Scriptures, prayer, study, keeping the commandments, following Jesus, all these become the materials to build and strengthen your faith with. If you are missing the foundation of the Holy Spirit, you are more likely to fall away when the trials of life rain down upon you.

If it happened, yes, but is that to be normative today?

What do you think is the purpose of the Holy Spirit? What of the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Verse?

Mat 12:32
1Cor 12:3
Joh 15:26-27
Joh 16:13-15

But if God cannot error and the Bible is the Word of God, then it would follow that the Word of God cannot error.

I agree.

Then I'd include a good argument and good evidence as tools the Spirit uses.

I was not told where this method is advocated or where Scripture justifies it.

But again, this is simply using your experience to justify your experience. I do not see the basis. My faith is based on a historical fact. He is risen. The tomb was found empty. I believe that because I believe a study of history can prove that happened and validate the NT. I do not believe a study of history can validate the BOM.

We are not discussing the Book of Mormon right now. We are discussing the Holy Spirit. Until you can understand this aspect of "testing" the Book of Mormon through prayer, you are not going to understand any responses to the prayers.

First off, I have never been shown when the church apostasized and I find such a notion a direct contradiction of Jesus's words in Matthew 16 that the gates of Hell would not stand against the church. Also, I do avail of his holy Priesthood. Jesus is my high priest and he is the only priest that there is. There can be no others. No one can hold a Melchizedek priesthood besides Jesus Christ.

There is a discussion going on right now about the apostasy here on the LDS forum.

In all of this, I do not see an answer to the question.

And the problem is obviously me. How wonderful. Why is it that when the test fails, it's not the fault of the test but the person trying, but when it succeeds, that proves the test is true. It's hardly a valid way of proving the test if you throw out every example that works against it.

This involves you and the Holy Spirit. You have already admitted that you base your faith on historical fact. You sought for signs/evidences outside of the Bible and outside of God to validate the NT. You question where direction is even given in the Bible concerning the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit. Even when presented with Paul’s teachings you claim you do not see an answer to your question.

The test is not failing. You are not ready for the test. You have already pushed aside what can be learned about the Holy Spirit, and what can be learned from the Holy Spirit. God is not going to answer a prayer when you are not ready to receive the answer; or if you are not ready to accept the answer. You have placed your faith in worldly proofs in order to accept Jesus. Your faith is worldly – the world does not understand the spiritual; the world is unable to discern the true kingdom of God. You may have memorized Scripture and "learned" the Bible - but I don't see evidence of your learning with the benefit of the Holy Spirit guiding and directing you. You even look for scholars and the wisdom of man to show as proof that you have it right.

I did not ask where the Bible tells us to put faith in Jesus but where the Bible says to put faith in Jesus to find out if he is true.

By confessing Jesus in hope and faith that He is the Christ (and not because the world has offered its signs to you as proof), the Holy Spirit will testify that Jesus IS the Christ. That is just the way the plan of Salvation works. It is something that reaches your spirit – not your brain. Your brain can only digest words and try to make sense of them. When the Holy Spirit communicates with your spirit, you will know the difference.

I read things I disagree with many times. I read the Koran so I would better understand Islam. I have read Mormon Scriptures and now better understand Mormonism. I still say both are false. The faith I grew up with has proven to be true to every test I've put it to.

By your own admission you have tested your faith with man’s precepts and man’s evidence and man’s proof. You have taken no “leap” of faith. Your faith is based within safe boundaries where you have quantified and qualified it through your human eyes.

No. I can see the logical course of an argument and not agree with the argument. Again, you assume the problem must be with me. The truth is I saw no logical connection. It's a massive non sequitur.

It is the Holy Spirit who teaches us the mysteries of the kingdom of God. It is with our spirit communicating with the Holy Spirit that we are able to discern this.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

Thanks for the response. I have talked to many lds missionaries who didn't know that I was a Christian and not once was I ever told that I should pray about the Bible but only about the bom.

In all scenarios, the missionaries will first teach about the Book of Mormon. In the course of all investigations, the missionaries teach that the Bible is also the Word of God.

As I said:

It depends on who is being taught and how much they already know about Jesus Christ which would determine their need to pray about any additional scripture which is being presented to them.

IOW, in your case, if you had investigated the Church, they would have determined at some point that you WERE already Christian. That means you would have already accepted the Bible as the Word of God.

God bless,

jo

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

are you saying, jo, that the Bible is treated as a literary equivalent of a second class citizen in Mormonism?

[jo7241974]

are you saying, jo, that the Bible is treated as a literary equivalent of a second class citizen in Mormonism?

Not at all! All of our Standard Works are Holy Scripture - the Word of God. They are all precious to us. The Standard Works include: The Holy Bible (we use the KJV), The Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price. My Bible is just as worn and marked and highlighted as the rest of Scripture. In fact, every so often I have to replace my Bible and BoM because they are so well-used.

God bless,

jo

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

okay, but then why is the Bible further down the presentation - "In the course of all investigations, the missionaries teach that the Bible is also the Word of God"?

[jo7241974]

okay, but then why is the Bible further down the presentation - "In the course of all investigations, the missionaries teach that the Bible is also the Word of God"?

Because Jesus has restored His Church, not just reorganized it. The Book of Mormon has not suffered through thousands of years of translation-inherrant inaccuracies and misintrepretation problems which the Bible has. "Further down the presentation" occurs in the first meeting. The other two Standard Works are usually introduced early in the investigation as well - depending on the investigator's readiness. People are taught in accordance with their own pace and desire. Hence; "at some point".

When teaching agnostics and atheists (when the chance arises) who have only negative things to say about the Bible and Christianity in general; or when teaching members of non-Christian religions, they can be more receptive to first learning about the Book of Mormon.

Still, as I have already commented, most of the individuals missionaries teach are already Christian and have already accepted the Bible as the Word of God. Both books are taught from.

God bless,

jo

[wonbyone]

Because Jesus has restored His Church, not just reorganized it.

If the lds church is a restoratation of His church why has He continued to let Orthodox Christianity flourish?

The Book of Mormon has not suffered through thousands of years of translation-inherrant inaccuracies and misintrepretation problems which the Bible has.

:no: Jo do you think that modern translations are taken from other translations or from the oldest manuscripts available?
How many revisions of the bom have been made? Why were they made?


When teaching agnostics and atheists (when the chance arises) who have only negative things to say about the Bible and Christianity in general; or when teaching members of non-Christian religions, they can be more receptive to first learning about the Book of Mormon.
Please explain this logic?


Still, as I have already commented, most of the individuals missionaries teach are already Christian and have already accepted the Bible as the Word of God. Both books are taught from.

Sooo you guys are christians sending out missionaries to convert Christians?

[JAYMZ]

I am glad you pray to be led and guided by The Holy Spirit. Such is the prayer regarding confirmation that the Book of Mormon is true.
While I have investigated the BoM and have read large portions of it, I have felt no need to pray about the BoM. I have read some of the Koran, but never prayed about it. I study the teachings of the JWs ( and the new world translation ) but i have never felt the need to pray about them.

I am lead by the Holy Spirit and yet you and I come to different conclusions about the BoM. We both cant be right. Orthodox christianity has the true gospel or the gospel changes every time a new sect comes along. There are small reasons why I reject the BoM ( its absurd use of king james english ) and there are bigger reasons. ( archeology, circumstances with Smith and his witness ) but all the little things and big things add up.

Most of all, I look at the doctrines that are a product of Smith and his BoM; heretical views of God and the perverting of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

That is the biggest nail in the coffin for me.

[Shadow Phoenix]

Peter said he was present at the Transfiguration and heard Heavenly Father speak from Heaven, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased". He then points to the prophecy of old time which has now been fulfilled. IOW Jesus Christ is who the prophets said would come. That's why he said we now have a more sure prophecy; because Heavenly Father himself confirmed who Jesus was to those who witnessed the Transfiguration.

But notice he said we have the Word of the Prophets made more certain. He did not wish to emphasize the experience. He wished to emphasize the Word. The experience was only to bolster the Scriptures. The Scriptures were not to bolster the experience.

He goes on to say: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

When the Holy Spirit witnesses to you, you receive a solid foundation to build your faith upon. The Scriptures, prayer, study, keeping the commandments, following Jesus, all these become the materials to build and strengthen your faith with. If you are missing the foundation of the Holy Spirit, you are more likely to fall away when the trials of life rain down upon you.

That's not what he's saying. He's saying the prophets did not make up what they said. The Spirit was guiding them in what they said. They didn't pull it out of their heads as it were. The prophets were also a minority in Israel and we should not take the minority and assume their experience is normative. Note also that the Hebrews writer reminds us that in these last days God has spoken by his Son.



What do you think is the purpose of the Holy Spirit? What of the gift of the Holy Spirit?

The role of the Spirit in our life is to lead us into sanctification and point us to Christ. The gifts of the Spirit are described in 1 Cor. 12 and 14 and the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5.



Mat 12:32

I do not see that in this passage. I see the resistance of the Spirit, but not what you're talking about.

1Cor 12:3

No one can say without the Spirit indwelling him that Jesus is Lord. Correct. I do not see how this backs your point.

Joh 15:26-27

Where does the passage say how the Spirit testifies?

Joh 16:13-15

Again, we are not told the medium whereby this was done and this was a promise made to the apostles as well, and not to all people.



I agree.

Then I would say you should believe in the inerrancy of Scripture.



We are not discussing the Book of Mormon right now. We are discussing the Holy Spirit. Until you can understand this aspect of "testing" the Book of Mormon through prayer, you are not going to understand any responses to the prayers.

Very well. Let us get the Scripture's doctrine of the Spirit.



There is a discussion going on right now about the apostasy here on the LDS forum.

I know.



This involves you and the Holy Spirit. You have already admitted that you base your faith on historical fact. You sought for signs/evidences outside of the Bible and outside of God to validate the NT. You question where direction is even given in the Bible concerning the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit. Even when presented with Paul’s teachings you claim you do not see an answer to your question.

You have not given one. I did the method the apostles said, such as checking with eyewitnesses. Notice that even the writing of the Scriptures themselves indicated the need for historical evidence. You are never told to pray to see if the gospels are true. They are not written largely to tell us about the life of Christ rooted in history.

This was what the early church pointed to. Their guy, Jesus, actually lived, died, and rose again. He was a historical figure and he did miracles in history. Luke himself in 1:1-4 of his gospel points to doing historical research to prove what he was writing.

I have not been shown anything in Paul that convinces me of the Mormon view. Also, I did find plenty that validated the NT which is why I believe it to be true. It is not true because it claims to be the Word of God. It is true because it proves to be the Word of God.

The test is not failing. You are not ready for the test.

Because the test cannot fail apparently to a Mormon. Tell me, is there any way your test is falsifiable?

You have already pushed aside what can be learned about the Holy Spirit, and what can be learned from the Holy Spirit.

No. I just disagree with your interpretation.

God is not going to answer a prayer when you are not ready to receive the answer; or if you are not ready to accept the answer. You have placed your faith in worldly proofs in order to accept Jesus.

Yes. My Jesus came into this world. I am no gnostic. I accept the evidence he left behind and I do not deem something lesser because it is "worldly."

Your faith is worldly – the world does not understand the spiritual; the world is unable to discern the true kingdom of God.

You are equivocating on world. World in the first sense refers to the material world. World in this section however refers to the world of sin.

You may have memorized Scripture and "learned" the Bible - but I don't see evidence of your learning with the benefit of the Holy Spirit guiding and directing you. You even look for scholars and the wisdom of man to show as proof that you have it right.

Which is just what the early church did. You claim you do not see evidence. Well I can just as well say you don't see it because you don't want to see it just like you say I don't have an answer because I won't accept the answer. The sword cuts both ways.



By confessing Jesus in hope and faith that He is the Christ (and not because the world has offered its signs to you as proof), the Holy Spirit will testify that Jesus IS the Christ. That is just the way the plan of Salvation works. It is something that reaches your spirit – not your brain. Your brain can only digest words and try to make sense of them. When the Holy Spirit communicates with your spirit, you will know the difference.

Which is the problem of a faith that denies the intellectual. I am to love God with my mind as well as with the heart. Note also I did not become a Christian upon studying the evidence. I was a Christian first but studied when I needed to know how real my faith was in the face of opposition. It passes with flying colors.



By your own admission you have tested your faith with man’s precepts and man’s evidence and man’s proof. You have taken no “leap” of faith. Your faith is based within safe boundaries where you have quantified and qualified it through your human eyes.

False. I cannot prove with certainty that Jesus rose from the dead. We have probabilities in history. However, I see strong evidence and I am willing to place my trust in Christ.



It is the Holy Spirit who teaches us the mysteries of the kingdom of God. It is with our spirit communicating with the Holy Spirit that we are able to discern this.

God bless,

jo


I still do not see any logical connection here.

[JAYMZ]

The Book of Mormon has not suffered through thousands of years of translation-inherrant inaccuracies and misintrepretation problems which the Bible has. "Further down the presentation" occurs in the first meeting. The other two Standard Works are usually introduced early in the investigation as well - depending on the investigator's readiness. People are taught in accordance with their own pace and desire. Hence; "at some point".

jo
Then why the changes that occurred between 1830, 1837, 1888, 1920, 1964, and 1978 ?
Since Smith got the translation directly ( and miraculously ) from the original plates, there shouldnt have been any errors.

( or in king james english :teeth: )

[jo7241974]

wonbyone;2838581]If the lds church is a restoratation of His church why has He continued to let Orthodox Christianity flourish?

Because there is still some truth taught in Christendom. And those who accept Jesus as their Savior will still have the chance to be saved. At some point, however, they will have to be baptized with the proper authority and have other ordinances completed with the proper authority before they are judged. That can take place while they are still in the flesh, or it can take place after their physical death. Before physical death is preferable because it gives you the opportunity to live at least part of your earthly life within His restored Church where you can enjoy this most wonderful blessing now.

:no: Jo do you think that modern translations are taken from other translations or from the oldest manuscripts available?
How many revisions of the bom have been made? Why were they made?

Off topic

Please explain this logic?

That's easy. Read up on why agnostics and atheists don't want anything to do with historical Christianity. Ask them what they think of the Bible. Since the BoM is not yet as widely read as the Bible, at least the missionaries have an opportunity to discuss the Gospel from the pages of a book they are unfamiliar with....perchance opening a door for them to reconsider the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sooo you guys are christians sending out missionaries to convert Christians?

Sure. We're not trying to convert Christian's to come to Jesus Christ. We're teaching them that Jesus has restored His Church. We are sharing this awesome news. We're spreading His restored Church the same way His original Church was spread.

God bless,

jo

[wonbyone]

And those who accept Jesus as their Savior will still have the chance to be saved.
So their not saved when they accept Jesus?

At some point, however, they will have to be baptized with the proper authority and have other ordinances completed with the proper authority before they are judged.

This must only be in lds literature ?

That can take place while they are still in the flesh, or it can take place after their physical death. Before physical death is preferable because it gives you the opportunity to live at least part of your earthly life within His restored Church where you can enjoy this most wonderful blessing now.

Can you name anyone in the Bible that was baptized after death? Why wasn't the rich man allowed a second chance after death?

Off topic
So it's ok to make unsubstantiated claims about the Bible?



That's easy. Read up on why agnostics and atheists don't want anything to do with historical Christianity. Ask them what they think of the Bible. Since the BoM is not yet as widely read as the Bible, at least the missionaries have an opportunity to discuss the Gospel from the pages of a book they are unfamiliar with....perchance opening a door for them to reconsider the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Since they want nothing to do with Christians how would it be different with mormons claiming to be Christians?

Sure. We're not trying to convert Christian's to come to Jesus Christ. We're teaching them that Jesus has restored His Church. We are sharing this awesome news. We're spreading His restored Church the same way His original Church was spread.
But how can they already be Christians if they aren't part of the true church?
Do you really want to claim that mormonism is spreading like first century Christianity?

[JAYMZ]

Because there is still some truth taught in Christendom. And those who accept Jesus as their Savior will still have the chance to be saved. At some point, however, they will have to be baptized with the proper authority and have other ordinances completed with the proper authority before they are judged. That can take place while they are still in the flesh, or it can take place after their physical death. Before physical death is preferable because it gives you the opportunity to live at least part of your earthly life within His restored Church where you can enjoy this most wonderful blessing now.

jo
" .......at some point, however, they will have to be baptized with the proper authority ...."
see, this is the controlling nature that is the hallmark of all cults; its our way or the highway. " You can only be saved by our organization. "
I am saved by trusting in what Christ has done for me and then I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We dont need all this stuff that you guys want to heap on top of us. LDS ( and groups like it ) make the gospel so complicated !

LDS - " ok, if thats all you want........ basic salvation..... but heavenly father has sooo much more for you, if you will but JOIN US. " " You can become like God in the celestial kingdom, if you work hard enough for that reward. "
NO THANKS, I would rather serve MY God than try to be a god myself.
( I really dont want to offend anyone, but sometimes the truth is offensive. The gospel is an offense.............but we dont have to add to that offense by our actions )

Ok, soapbox rant done.:smile:

[jo7241974]

[QUOTE]Shadow Phoenix;2838652]

AP/SP,

When you understand what Paul was teaching, you will understand what I have been trying to tell you.

1 Cor 2:9-16 (KJV)

9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

I am so astounded by your responses. Jesus never taught us to come to him in faith through proof of physical evidence or manuscripts. To get to know Jesus requires faith; not proof. The Holy Spirit is here for everybody. You even admit that the purpose of the Holy Spirit is to point to Christ. Yet you do not know how this takes place, or if it is meant for everyone. How can the Holy Spirit point us to Christ if we do not seek?

Matt 7:7-8 (KJV)

7Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

8For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

John 15:26 (KJV)

26But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13-14 (KJV)

13Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

14He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

This is not a discussion we are having. You have no desire to either hear or understand what I am saying. Yet I have patiently continued to answer your questions. You aren't even meeting me half way.

The power you give to man and to the world is a huge stumbling block.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

Then why the changes that occurred between 1830, 1837, 1888, 1920, 1964, and 1978 ?
Since Smith got the translation directly ( and miraculously ) from the original plates, there shouldnt have been any errors.

( or in king james english :teeth: )

Not only has this issue been discussed ad nauseum - just not with your stamp of approval because, surprise, you disagree (that's why you believe what you believe, and I believe what I believe....we disagree); this is also off topic.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

wonbyone;2838768]So their not saved when they accept Jesus?

Just because a person accepts Jesus, this does not guaranty they get to live with Jesus throughout eternity. Everybody still has to be judged.

This must only be in lds literature ?

No - it is the same literature you and I both us. The Bible teaches we will all be judged.


Can you name anyone in the Bible that was baptized after death? Why wasn't the rich man allowed a second chance after death?

The rich man is in the spirit world awaiting resurrection. We are not told where he will spend eternity. Since we don't know his final judgement, who can say?

So it's ok to make unsubstantiated claims about the Bible?

Off topic - This OP is about testing the BoM by prayer.

Since they want nothing to do with Christians how would it be different with mormons claiming to be Christians?

It is not that they don't want anything to do with Christians. They are tired of the typical approach by Christians to try to convert them.

But how can they already be Christians if they aren't part of the true church?

That's an ignorant question. Not only do we keep telling you that we believe you ARE Christian, but I have also been careful in my discussion with you to identify those who have already accepted Jesus Christ as having already accepted the Bible as the Word of God.

Do you really want to claim that mormonism is spreading like first century Christianity?

Yes; in fact I already did make that claim that it is being spread through missionary work.

God bless,

jo

[wonbyone]

Just because a person accepts Jesus, this does not guaranty they get to live with Jesus throughout eternity.


I though you could know before you die that you are guaranteed eternal life through faith in Chrsit(1 John5:13).


Everybody still has to be judged.
Correct the saved will be judged for rewards and the lost will be judged for punishment.

No - it is the same literature you and I both us. The Bible teaches we will all be judged.

I was responding to your statement about having to be baptized for salvation and the oppurtunity to be baptized after death.


The rich man is in the spirit world awaiting resurrection. We are not told where he will spend eternity. Since we don't know his final judgement, who can say?

He is in Hades where the lost go pretty clear to me.

Off topic - This OP is about testing the BoM by prayer.
When you post a challenge of the Bible and I respond how is that off topic?

It is not that they don't want anything to do with Christians. They are tired of the typical approach by Christians to try to convert them.

Oh I get it you guys try to deceive them.

That's an ignorant question. Not only do we keep telling you that we believe you ARE Christian, but I have also been careful in my discussion with you to identify those who have already accepted Jesus Christ as having already accepted the Bible as the Word of God.
It's not an ignorant question as we Christians believe that if you are not a part of the true church(The body of Christ) than you aren't a Christian.

Yes; in fact I already did make that claim that it is being spread through missionary work.
So your church suffers persecution like the first century church and your apostles do the same miracles as the original apostles?

[Philosophickle]

Not only has this issue been discussed ad nauseum - just not with your stamp of approval because, surprise, you disagree (that's why you believe what you believe, and I believe what I believe....we disagree); this is also off topic.

God bless,

jo

For the record, you dropped a spurious assertion about the Bible; do you expect to make unchallenged drive-bys on one of our doctrines?

[Sparko]

For the record, you dropped a spurious assertion about the Bible; do you expect to make unchallenged drive-bys on one of our doctrines?
why would she stop now?

[LDSTrue]

While I have investigated the BoM and have read large portions of it, I have felt no need to pray about the BoM. I have read some of the Koran, but never prayed about it. I study the teachings of the JWs ( and the new world translation ) but i have never felt the need to pray about them.

I am lead by the Holy Spirit and yet you and I come to different conclusions about the BoM. We both cant be right. Orthodox christianity has the true gospel or the gospel changes every time a new sect comes along. There are small reasons why I reject the BoM ( its absurd use of king james english ) and there are bigger reasons. ( archeology, circumstances with Smith and his witness ) but all the little things and big things add up.

Most of all, I look at the doctrines that are a product of Smith and his BoM; heretical views of God and the perverting of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

That is the biggest nail in the coffin for me.

Have you had a chance to view the Apostle Elder Holland’s talk given in General Conference October 2009 regarding his testimony of the Book of Mormon?

I was at a meeting last evening where it was replayed and it was the most powerful, spiritual witness of the truthfulness Book of Mormon I have ever witnessed!

Here is a link to the last 9:46 minutes of his 16 minute talk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5jJ8QciIaw&feature=response_watch

After you have had a chance to watch it (again?), I would appreciate your remarks to his comments and specifically those relating to Joseph and his Brother willing to die and leave their families fatherless rather than deny the truthfulness of their dealings with Jesus.

My question to you is; would you be willing to continue in a lie regarding your interaction with the Savior if you knew you were going to meet him shortly? Is that what you accuse Joseph and his brother of?

I appreciate the way Elder Holland truthfully dealt with that misguided opinion.

[Sparko]

Joseph Smith never planned on dying, and I think that even if he did know he was going to die he would keep up the lie, because he knew if he admitted the truth, the very mormons around him would string him up for fooling them.

and please stop posting links to that boring speech. OC already posted it several times. I have tinkered with using it as a way to get to sleep faster at night, but I am worried I might have nightmares of seeing the video over and over.

[JAYMZ]

Not only has this issue been discussed ad nauseum - just not with your stamp of approval because, surprise, you disagree (that's why you believe what you believe, and I believe what I believe....we disagree); this is also off topic.

God bless,

jo
Jo, since we are talking about the BoM, it is relevant.
You made a comment, and I made a relevant comment to your criticism of the bible.

It is also relevant as to one of the various reasons why we dont have to pray concerning the BoM.

[Shadow Phoenix]

[QUOTE]Shadow Phoenix;2838652]

AP/SP,

When you understand what Paul was teaching, you will understand what I have been trying to tell you.

1 Cor 2:9-16 (KJV)

9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

I am so astounded by your responses. Jesus never taught us to come to him in faith through proof of physical evidence or manuscripts. To get to know Jesus requires faith; not proof. The Holy Spirit is here for everybody. You even admit that the purpose of the Holy Spirit is to point to Christ. Yet you do not know how this takes place, or if it is meant for everyone. How can the Holy Spirit point us to Christ if we do not seek?

I have no problem with seeking. I also said that the text itself does not tell us how this takes place. Furthermore, Christ did believe in using evidence. He used the evidence of Scripture already confirmed, he used the evidence of miracles, and he used the evidence of the empty tomb. He didn't call people to believe him blindly.

As for what Paul said, I agree with it. It's by the Spirit that one testifies that Jesus is the Christ and the Spirit's work leads him to that conclusion. What's the problem?

Matt 7:7-8 (KJV)

7Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

8For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

Do you think this is a blank check?

John 15:26 (KJV)

26But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13-14 (KJV)

13Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

14He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

I've already addressed these

This is not a discussion we are having. You have no desire to either hear or understand what I am saying. Yet I have patiently continued to answer your questions. You aren't even meeting me half way.

The power you give to man and to the world is a huge stumbling block.

God bless,

jo

Again, you are equivocating on man and world. The Christ of history is the Christ of faith.

[JAYMZ]

Have you had a chance to view the Apostle Elder Holland’s talk given in General Conference October 2009 regarding his testimony of the Book of Mormon?

I was at a meeting last evening where it was replayed and it was the most powerful, spiritual witness of the truthfulness Book of Mormon I have ever witnessed!

Here is a link to the last 9:46 minutes of his 16 minute talk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5jJ8QciIaw&feature=response_watch

After you have had a chance to watch it (again?), I would appreciate your remarks to his comments and specifically those relating to Joseph and his Brother willing to die and leave their families fatherless rather than deny the truthfulness of their dealings with Jesus.

My question to you is; would you be willing to continue in a lie regarding your interaction with the Savior if you knew you were going to meet him shortly? Is that what you accuse Joseph and his brother of?

I appreciate the way Elder Holland truthfully dealt with that misguided opinion.
I watched it and it really seems like Hollands convinced of Smiths claims.
I need more than just someone dying for a new religion that they started.

Jim Jones was willing to die for his beliefs, but I doubt that you you guys believe he was a prophet of God.
For me ( and most other christians ) I judge the truth claims of the LDS based on three main, separate things. The validity of the BoM, the validity of Smith as a prophet, and the doctrines of the mormon church. It just so happens the LDS fails in all three areas.

God has confirmed the un-truth of the LDS in simplist ways and in the most substantial ways.
The simplist being how I seriously start laughing when I read the BoM. ( honestly, I mean no offense but its true ) The substantial being the horrendous doctrines of the LDS.

[LDSTrue]

I watched it and it really seems like Hollands convinced of Smiths claims.
I need more than just someone dying for a new religion that they started.

Jim Jones was willing to die for his beliefs, but I doubt that you you guys believe he was a prophet of God.
For me ( and most other christians ) I judge the truth claims of the LDS based on three main, separate things. The validity of the BoM, the validity of Smith as a prophet, and the doctrines of the mormon church. It just so happens the LDS fails in all three areas.

God has confirmed the un-truth of the LDS in simplist ways and in the most substantial ways.
The simplist being how I seriously start laughing when I read the BoM. ( honestly, I mean no offense but its true ) The substantial being the horrendous doctrines of the LDS.

Okay… I guess.
Thanks!

BTW, IMO, Jim Jones committed suicide and was not a martyr for Jesus, the truth, nor His Church as was Joseph Smith and his brother.

And I noticed you left out the Holy Ghost revealing to you that the Book of Mormon was false.

And you said;

I need more than just someone dying for a new religion that they started.
You mean someone like Jesus who left behind Apostles and subsequently their writings? Didn’t he die for a new religion!

Both Jesus and Joseph have provided you with ample proof of the restoration in these latter-days. I refer you to Doctrine and Covenants Section 1. BTW, what part of the restitution of all things has your church restored in these latter-days in conjunction with;

Acts 3:20-21

[20] “And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:

[21] Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.”

The substantial being the horrendous doctrines of the LDS.

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Horrendous = awful: causing fear or dread or terror;… "horrendous doctrines of the LDS." Really???!!!

[JAYMZ]

Okay… I guess.
And I noticed you left out the Holy Ghost revealing to you that the Book of Mormon was false.




wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Horrendous = awful: causing fear or dread or terror;… "horrendous doctrines of the LDS." Really???!!!

If it is some thing that contradicts scripture, hasnt the Holy Spirit spoken already ?

Horrendous. Ok, maybe for Joseph Smith standing before a holy God; answering for those he led astray. Offensive for those that love God and love the truth.

[jo7241974]

wonbyone;2838984]I though you could know before you die that you are guaranteed eternal life through faith in Chrsit(1 John5:13).

You "may" have eternal life is not the same as: you "have" eternal life.

He is in Hades where the lost go pretty clear to me.

Really? Please explain.

When you post a challenge of the Bible and I respond how is that off topic?

The OP is about testing the Book of Mormon by Prayer. The LDS posters are explaining this. It is about time those who disagree with us stick to the topic because our answers will always bring up other beliefs of ours which antagonists disagree with. These other issues have already been discussed. We will never be able to answer any OP if you use our answers to once again attack our other beliefs as well. We should try to remain focused on the actual OP and not get sidetracked by continuing attacks for issues we have already addressed. You already know that we believe the Bible has errors in it, which has resulted in many, many discussions. You then treat this belief as though it has been unaddressed. You also treat it as though we are the only ones who feel this way. But this is not true. Honest Christians recognize there are errors in the Bible. But this does not detract from the fact that the Bible is still the Word of God. It is because man has had his failable hand in it that causes errors. But God's truths are still there.

Oh I get it you guys try to deceive them.

Actually, you don't get it at all.


It's not an ignorant question as we Christians believe that if you are not a part of the true church(The body of Christ) than you aren't a Christian.

Yes it was an ignorant question. In fact, the question did not need to be asked at all because my comments already provided information to preclude the necessity of you asking your question. But you chose to ignore this in order to once more attack our beliefs, and misrepresent them once again. IOW, rather than staying on topic, you are searching for key words and thoughts which you can attack repeatedly, because you have no sincere desire to understand our beliefs at all. You merely start new OP's for the sole purpose of attacking everything we say, at which time you also continue to misrepresent our beliefs. Your curiosity is false; your comments misrepresent our beliefs. You have no sincere desire to obtain knowledge regardless of whether you agree with it or not.

So your church suffers persecution like the first century church and your apostles do the same miracles as the original apostles?

I see you have padded my answer so that you can bring up other issues you have with the Church, again. More dishonesty on your part. But I will address it anyway. My answer was that we spread the restored Gospel through missionary work, which is the same way the early church spread the Gospel.

You ask if the Church suffers persecution like the first century church. Do you really need to ask that? Our short history bears record of it.

You ask if the Apostles do the same miracles as the original Apostles. This has also been addressed already.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

For the record, you dropped a spurious assertion about the Bible; do you expect to make unchallenged drive-bys on one of our doctrines?

It's interesting that, although you read the threads here on this forum which have already addressed this issue, that you still found it necessary to make your "drive-by" comment. By the way, the Holy Bible is the Word of God and is precious, regardless of the human errors it contains. The Bible is my Scripture as well. You have no exclusive rights to it.

Here is what I just posted to Wonbyone about this very issue:

The OP is about testing the Book of Mormon by Prayer. The LDS posters are explaining this. It is about time those who disagree with us stick to the topic because our answers will always bring up other beliefs of ours which antagonists disagree with. These other issues have already been discussed. We will never be able to answer any OP if you use our answers to once again attack our other beliefs as well. We should try to remain focused on the actual OP and not get sidetracked by continuing attacks for issues we have already addressed. You already know that we believe the Bible has errors in it, which has resulted in many, many discussions. You then treat this belief as though it has been unaddressed. You also treat it as though we are the only ones who feel this way. But this is not true. Honest Christians recognize there are errors in the Bible. But this does not detract from the fact that the Bible is still the Word of God. It is because man has had his failable hand in it that causes errors. But God's truths are still there.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

" .......at some point, however, they will have to be baptized with the proper authority ...."
see, this is the controlling nature that is the hallmark of all cults; its our way or the highway. " You can only be saved by our organization. "
I am saved by trusting in what Christ has done for me and then I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We dont need all this stuff that you guys want to heap on top of us. LDS ( and groups like it ) make the gospel so complicated !

LDS - " ok, if thats all you want........ basic salvation..... but heavenly father has sooo much more for you, if you will but JOIN US. " " You can become like God in the celestial kingdom, if you work hard enough for that reward. "
NO THANKS, I would rather serve MY God than try to be a god myself.
( I really dont want to offend anyone, but sometimes the truth is offensive. The gospel is an offense.............but we dont have to add to that offense by our actions )

Ok, soapbox rant done.:smile:

I hope you feel better now. :smile:

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

Joseph Smith never planned on dying, and I think that even if he did know he was going to die he would keep up the lie, because he knew if he admitted the truth, the very mormons around him would string him up for fooling them.

and please stop posting links to that boring speech. OC already posted it several times. I have tinkered with using it as a way to get to sleep faster at night, but I am worried I might have nightmares of seeing the video over and over.

I find it quite telling that in response to an LDS person sharing their testimony, rather than defending their own beliefs with their testimony, our enemies try to make us look foolish.

[JAYMZ]

Jo, maybe you could start another thread dealing with all the current errors in the bible; that you perceive.

[jo7241974]

Jo, since we are talking about the BoM, it is relevant.
You made a comment, and I made a relevant comment to your criticism of the bible.

It is also relevant as to one of the various reasons why we dont have to pray concerning the BoM.

I'm just copying my response to Wonbyone:

The OP is about testing the Book of Mormon by Prayer. The LDS posters are explaining this. It is about time those who disagree with us stick to the topic because our answers will always bring up other beliefs of ours which antagonists disagree with. These other issues have already been discussed. We will never be able to answer any OP if you use our answers to once again attack our other beliefs as well. We should try to remain focused on the actual OP and not get sidetracked by continuing attacks for issues we have already addressed. You already know that we believe the Bible has errors in it, which has resulted in many, many discussions. You then treat this belief as though it has been unaddressed. You also treat it as though we are the only ones who feel this way. But this is not true. Honest Christians recognize there are errors in the Bible. But this does not detract from the fact that the Bible is still the Word of God. It is because man has had his failable hand in it that causes errors. But God's truths are still there.

God bless,

jo

[JAYMZ]

Jo, maybe you could start another thread dealing with all the current errors in the bible; that you perceive.

Because im not sure what you mean by errors.

[JAYMZ]

Do any LDS members believe people can have subjective experiences ? If so, can you give possible examples that might occur in other religions ?
Objectively, why couldnt the " burning in the bosom " be just a way around not relying on sound biblical doctrine for guidance ?

[jo7241974]

Because im not sure what you mean by errors.

Hi Jaymz:

Here are two websites which appear to be pretty impartial, in that they accept that there are errors, but they are not being critical about them:

Part 1 of the study: http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/kjverror.html

Part 2 of the study: http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/king-james-version-bible-translation-errors-2.html

I personally have noticed errors from time to time; but because they are human error, they do not cause me concern. When I speak of the errors within the Bible, this is merely a matter-of-fact comment which does not belittle in any way, shape, or form, that the Bible is the Word of God.

There have been one or two more significant errors which totally changed the intent of the author that I noticed recently - but they were contained in a version of the Bible other than the KJV. In fact, it made that version contradict itself. I mentioned these in my posts here on Tweb at the time I spotted them. I should have copied them into a list someplace, but did not. The KJV, which is my version of choice, had the correct translations, however. So, unless I resort to another version of the Bible, these two instances are mute.

God bless,

jo

[jo7241974]

Do any LDS members believe people can have subjective experiences ? If so, can you give possible examples that might occur in other religions ?
Objectively, why couldnt the " burning in the bosom " be just a way around not relying on sound biblical doctrine for guidance ?

As I have stated before, my experience with the Holy Spirit has never contradicted the Bible. Any witness from the Holy Spirit concerning Scripture has made Scripture more sure to me; it strengthens the Word of God and opens my mind spiritually to finer nuances and sense of truthfulness which is beyond the power of words which convinces me. Other experience with the Holy Spirit is for me personally - in helping me to make better and wiser choices, in giving me direction on personal matters such as how to handle specific problems I may be having or which loved ones may be having; yet other experiences with the Holy Spirit are immediate and extremely specific such as in times when I am in physical danger; yet others bring me peace and comfort, or joy beyond my ability to express it; and other experiences prompt me and make me aware that someone is in need---if I am listening I can be of service. It is like having a continual telephone signal which I can either access or which can access me at any time. It is real. To my spirit it is tangible. It is from God. It is a most Holy Gift and when I allow it to be, it is my 24/7 lifeline to Heavenly Father.

As a result? My understanding of the kingdom of God increases. My desire to follow Jesus becomes my perfect. My love for Heavenly Father and my Savior Jesus Christ become more profound and consuming.

Can this be discussed objectively? I don't know how. I can only share my fumbling human ability to try to explain.

God bless,

jo

[franktalk]

2 Peter 1:16-21 says the opposite. Peter spoke of seeing the Transfiguration, but he said the more important aspect is that the Word of the prophets is proven certain and he pointed people to that Word. I consider a faith built on Scripture to be quite strong and I consider it a horrible denigration of Scripture to say that it is a foundation of sand.

The prophets spoke of history before it unfolded. This was a mechanism to reveal the real prophets from the false ones. Those who forecast the future correctly we read about, those who got it wrong we do not know their names. Even a Pharisee named Gamaliel got it right when he recommended that the ideas of Jesus would play out as nothing or the truth of God. If truth then there was nothing they could do to stop it, but if of men then it will die on it's own.


But if God cannot error and the Bible is the Word of God, then it would follow that the Word of God cannot error.

That is a solid argument but man twist it by his many interpretations.

Then I'd include a good argument and good evidence as tools the Spirit uses.

Since you just stated that scripture can't err then where is this coming from??????? With proof who needs a good argument? Show me the "good evidence" so that I too can believe.

But again, this is simply using your experience to justify your experience. I do not see the basis. My faith is based on a historical fact. He is risen. The tomb was found empty. I believe that because I believe a study of history can prove that happened and validate the NT. I do not believe a study of history can validate the BOM.

Your faith is based on historical fact? What facts would that be? You mean a chain of opinions you happen to believe in? What makes someone a truth teller and another a liar? Could it be that you have faith in one opinion over another? Please point me to the proof of Jesus? Wasn't Jesus was telling us through the disciples that it is faith that we are to have in Christ and God? Should we push this aside and say we have a more perfect proof? Are you making Christ and the disciples liars? You may feel you have proof but you have vapor. Christ would never give proof if He wants us to come to Him in faith. Read Romans 1 until you get it. May take a year or two. You seem rather dense and blind, maybe three years.

First off, I have never been shown when the church apostasized and I find such a notion a direct contradiction of Jesus's words in Matthew 16 that the gates of Hell would not stand against the church. Also, I do avail of his holy Priesthood. Jesus is my high priest and he is the only priest that there is. There can be no others. No one can hold a Melchizedek priesthood besides Jesus Christ.

See dense and blind above.

And the problem is obviously me. How wonderful. Why is it that when the test fails, it's not the fault of the test but the person trying, but when it succeeds, that proves the test is true. It's hardly a valid way of proving the test if you throw out every example that works against it.

I did not ask where the Bible tells us to put faith in Jesus but where the Bible says to put faith in Jesus to find out if he is true.

See above.

I read things I disagree with many times. I read the Koran so I would better understand Islam. I have read Mormon Scriptures and now better understand Mormonism. I still say both are false. The faith I grew up with has proven to be true to every test I've put it to.

Who says? Thats what you say. Now tell me why you are correct and not another? Where is the proof of your argument? Show me the proof. Prove to me that what you say is true.

No. I can see the logical course of an argument and not agree with the argument. Again, you assume the problem must be with me. The truth is I saw no logical connection. It's a massive non sequitur.

Really. Oh most high great interpreter of truth please tell us what me must know.

[Philosophickle]

It's interesting that, although you read the threads here on this forum which have already addressed this issue, that you still found it necessary to make your "drive-by" comment.

Call it what you want. I lurk and rarely post in the LDS forums because I doubt I have the grace to keep composed around so much dishonesty. I made the mistake of interacting with you once before, and now I see why I told myself not to post in here again.

[LDSTrue]

Joseph Smith never planned on dying,

Yeh right, he planned on living on earth forever. I believe we all plan of dying regardless of our faith.

“When Joseph went to Carthage to deliver himself up to the pretended requirements of the law, two or three days previous to his assassination, he said: “I am going like a lamb to the slaughter; but I am calm as a summer’s morning; I have a conscience void of offense towards God, and towards all men. I SHALL DIE INNOCENT, AND IT SHALL YET BE SAID OF ME—HE WAS MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD.” (Doctrine and Covenants Section 135:4)

So do I understand you correctly; you accuse Joseph Smith of continuing to lie about his relationship and interactions with Jesus, his Lord and Savior, knowing he would meet Him shortly. A yes or no answer is sufficient.

and I think that even if he did know he was going to die

So, contrary to your first false statement at the beginning of your response, you agree he could have known he was going to be murdered in cold blood.

he would keep up the lie, because he knew if he admitted the truth, the very mormons around him would string him up for fooling them.

The Mormons around him would NOT have “string him up for fooling them” as unlike the painted faced ‘christian’ murderous mob shooting through a jailhouse door at innocent men, the Mormons in attendance did not believe in murdering the innocent for their beliefs.

Articles of Faith # 11; We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

and please stop posting links to that boring speech. OC already posted it several times. I have tinkered with using it as a way to get to sleep faster at night, but I am worried I might have nightmares of seeing the video over and over.

I will provide you one last chance to view one of the most spiritual and truthful testimonies of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon I have ever witnessed by a simple click of the mouse.

Here is the link to the first 7:55 minutes of his amazing and Spirit filled talk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mPIm_OGw7o&feature=related


Here is a link to the last 9:46 minutes of his amazing Spirit filled 16 total minute talk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5jJ8...response_watch

Ridicule and mock at your own eternal peril as it will come to pass just as Nephi spoke in 2 Nephi 33:10-11, 14-15;

10 "And now, my beloved brethren, and also Jew, and all ye ends of the earth, hearken unto these words and believe in Christ; and if ye believe not in these words believe in Christ. And if ye shall believe in Christ ye will believe in these words, for they are the words of Christ, and he hath given them unto me; and they teach all men that they should do good.

11 And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye—for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things, notwithstanding my weakness."

14 "And you that will not partake of the goodness of God, and respect the words of the Jews, and also my words, and the words which shall proceed forth out of the mouth of the Lamb of God, behold, I bid you an everlasting farewell, for these words shall condemn you at the last day.

15 For what I seal on earth, shall be brought against you at the judgment bar; for thus hath the Lord commanded me, and I must obey. Amen."

Your “nightmares” will actually begin when you see Nephi and Joseph Smith standing with Jesus across from you at the judgment bar.