Reader comments
MormonTimes.com: How to answer questions about the Book of Abraham
129 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
Thomas | 2:54 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
"To Thomas" -- I didn't say Abraham 2:23-24 means that the Book
of Abraham is false. I said it contains an account of God commanding someone to
lie. People can make of that what they will.
As for the argument that Sarah really was Abraham's sister because they were both spirit children of God, that's what's called a half-truth. It's still an intentional deception, because the speaker knows the listener will understand him to be using the ordinary sense of the word "sister," not the spiritual sense.
Put another way, if you tried that kind of half-truth in a business transaction, I can guarantee you would be found liable in a lawsuit for fraud.
As for the argument that Sarah really was Abraham's sister because they were both spirit children of God, that's what's called a half-truth. It's still an intentional deception, because the speaker knows the listener will understand him to be using the ordinary sense of the word "sister," not the spiritual sense.
Put another way, if you tried that kind of half-truth in a business transaction, I can guarantee you would be found liable in a lawsuit for fraud.
Thomas | 3:08 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Anonymous 1:36 -- Dang, that's weird stuff. The late Victorian age was
just stuffed with bizarre beliefs -- probably a result of Lyell and Darwin
kicking over the Genesis table and (in many people's minds) discrediting
traditional Christian religion. When people lose their traditional faith, they
don't usually become skeptics; most of them simply turn to other irrational
beliefs.
Check out Morgan Robertson's 1898 short story "Futility: Or, The Wreck of the Titan." Robertson described an ocean liner named the Titan, with dimensions, characteristics, and performance almost exactly that of the later RMS Titanic (which hadn't even been designed yet) striking an iceberg at 25 knots (almost exactly the same speed as the Titanic hit *its* iceberg at) and sinking with 2,500 of its passengers, who drowned because there weren't enough lifeboats.
Seriously, the coincidences are just spooky close.
Check out Morgan Robertson's 1898 short story "Futility: Or, The Wreck of the Titan." Robertson described an ocean liner named the Titan, with dimensions, characteristics, and performance almost exactly that of the later RMS Titanic (which hadn't even been designed yet) striking an iceberg at 25 knots (almost exactly the same speed as the Titanic hit *its* iceberg at) and sinking with 2,500 of its passengers, who drowned because there weren't enough lifeboats.
Seriously, the coincidences are just spooky close.
Comments continue below
Thomas | 3:20 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
"I have a question" --
That's a good question. *If* there exists a form of spiritual revelation that is truly unmistakable and infallible, *then* a person might be justified in giving it more credence than science -- which is, after all, as fallible as anything else human beings get their clumsy hands on.
The problem is in deciding what counts as an unmistakable spiritual witness. The FLDS fundamentalists, from the sound of them, believe they have received the same spiritual confirmation that their lifestyle is the true restored Gospel as mainstream Mormons do with respect to their church. I have no way of getting inside of the respective believers' heads to examine and compare what, exactly, each of them is feeling. I strongly suspect that if you hooked their brains up to monitors, you'd get very similar readings. Mystical religious experiences are common across many different religious traditions, and the sensations reported by those who've experienced them sound very similar.
I'm familiar with the warning to "quench not the Spirit." But at the same time, we're also commanded to obey God rather than men -- and many mere men seem able to elicit a mystical response in many people.
That's a good question. *If* there exists a form of spiritual revelation that is truly unmistakable and infallible, *then* a person might be justified in giving it more credence than science -- which is, after all, as fallible as anything else human beings get their clumsy hands on.
The problem is in deciding what counts as an unmistakable spiritual witness. The FLDS fundamentalists, from the sound of them, believe they have received the same spiritual confirmation that their lifestyle is the true restored Gospel as mainstream Mormons do with respect to their church. I have no way of getting inside of the respective believers' heads to examine and compare what, exactly, each of them is feeling. I strongly suspect that if you hooked their brains up to monitors, you'd get very similar readings. Mystical religious experiences are common across many different religious traditions, and the sensations reported by those who've experienced them sound very similar.
I'm familiar with the warning to "quench not the Spirit." But at the same time, we're also commanded to obey God rather than men -- and many mere men seem able to elicit a mystical response in many people.
Non-Believer | 3:21 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
To I Have A Question,
Your question is so convoluted, but I will take up your challenge.
You ask, "Is it not possible that God can communicate truth from Him to man through the Holy Ghost?" First you would have to believe in the Holy Ghost. I have never met such a being. Neither have you. If you disagree, please tell me, what does it look like? Is it male or female? Is it in the form of a human or an animal?
LDS teach that the Holy Ghost is "the 3rd member of the Godhead" and is, therefore, also "a god". Telling a person who does not believe in God to listen to the Holy Ghost testify of God is silly. The "role" of the Holy Ghost is to testify of God. But who testifies of the Holy Ghost? If the Holy Ghost �god� can testify of himself, why couldn�t God testify of himself directly? Why does God need the Holy Ghost as a �middleman?� Wasn�t Jesus supposed to be the �mediator� (middleman)?
The Book of Abraham fails to answer these questions. Both in terms of its �doctrinal� content and origins, it raises more questions than it answers.
Your question is so convoluted, but I will take up your challenge.
You ask, "Is it not possible that God can communicate truth from Him to man through the Holy Ghost?" First you would have to believe in the Holy Ghost. I have never met such a being. Neither have you. If you disagree, please tell me, what does it look like? Is it male or female? Is it in the form of a human or an animal?
LDS teach that the Holy Ghost is "the 3rd member of the Godhead" and is, therefore, also "a god". Telling a person who does not believe in God to listen to the Holy Ghost testify of God is silly. The "role" of the Holy Ghost is to testify of God. But who testifies of the Holy Ghost? If the Holy Ghost �god� can testify of himself, why couldn�t God testify of himself directly? Why does God need the Holy Ghost as a �middleman?� Wasn�t Jesus supposed to be the �mediator� (middleman)?
The Book of Abraham fails to answer these questions. Both in terms of its �doctrinal� content and origins, it raises more questions than it answers.
To Skeptics | 4:03 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Just what part of the Book of Abraham do you object to?
We have the book whether you believe JS translated it or not.
Let's discuss it's content.
We have the book whether you believe JS translated it or not.
Let's discuss it's content.
Thomas | 5:03 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
"To Skeptics" --
The content of the Book of Abraham is secondary to its claimed nature as a divinely-inspired translation. It *does* matter where the Book came from -- because if the story of its coming forth is as claimed, then follows that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and it can be argued from that premise that his successors are also prophets who ought to be obeyed, and their counsel deemed superior to even the strongest promptings of individual conscience. That is, even if we firmly believe something is morally wrong, there are those that argue that if a prophet says to do it, it should be done.
That is not something to be taken lightly.
As for the content, I have my reservations about Abr. 1:1 (the term "Chaldeans" postdates Abraham's time); 1:26-27 (supports the old ban on blacks holding the Priesthood); 2:22-24 (God commands a lie).
On the other hand, the doctrine that human identity is coeternal with God (Abr. 3:18) and the doctrine of the premortal existence (Abr. 3:22) are profound and good.
The content of the Book of Abraham is secondary to its claimed nature as a divinely-inspired translation. It *does* matter where the Book came from -- because if the story of its coming forth is as claimed, then follows that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and it can be argued from that premise that his successors are also prophets who ought to be obeyed, and their counsel deemed superior to even the strongest promptings of individual conscience. That is, even if we firmly believe something is morally wrong, there are those that argue that if a prophet says to do it, it should be done.
That is not something to be taken lightly.
As for the content, I have my reservations about Abr. 1:1 (the term "Chaldeans" postdates Abraham's time); 1:26-27 (supports the old ban on blacks holding the Priesthood); 2:22-24 (God commands a lie).
On the other hand, the doctrine that human identity is coeternal with God (Abr. 3:18) and the doctrine of the premortal existence (Abr. 3:22) are profound and good.
Sarah | 6:25 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Um. To those people who are upset over God supposedly commanding Abraham to lie,
you're forgetting one very important fact. This account was also described
in the book of Genesis, in chapters 12 and 20 - and in Genesis 20: 12, Abraham
clearly states that "And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter
of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife."
She WAS his sister, and in the verses previous to that one, he explains his reasons for saying so: that if he had said she was also his wife, they would have killed him and taken her with them because she was desirable, but this way, he was able to befriend them and teach them about the gospel before the full truth came out.
It wasn't a lie. It wasn't the full truth, though he certainly later confessed everything, but it also wasn't a lie. A sin of omission, yes, but he was able to teach the gospel to a group of people, and keep his life and his wife, when if he hadn't, none of those things would have been possible.
She WAS his sister, and in the verses previous to that one, he explains his reasons for saying so: that if he had said she was also his wife, they would have killed him and taken her with them because she was desirable, but this way, he was able to befriend them and teach them about the gospel before the full truth came out.
It wasn't a lie. It wasn't the full truth, though he certainly later confessed everything, but it also wasn't a lie. A sin of omission, yes, but he was able to teach the gospel to a group of people, and keep his life and his wife, when if he hadn't, none of those things would have been possible.
Correction: | 6:35 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Sorry, the accounts in Genesis are two separate instances of Abraham doing the
exact same thing, not one and the same. But the point still stands, this was
something that had happened on several occasions, and it wasn't a lie.
Isaac, however, DID lie in saying that Rebekah was his sister for the same
reason. She wasn't even his half-sister like in Abraham's case. That
account is also in the book of Genesis, chapter 26. Apparently, this was a
common practice for the old Patriarchs.
~Sarah
~Sarah
Writing analyses... | 6:51 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
are admissable in court, where many other sciences are not. They are accepted by
the scientific community as accurate, at least to within an acceptable margin of
error. In fact, they're not only allowed in court, many of them are
sanctioned by the courts to prove the validity of a contested will or other
document. Of course the practice has flaws, all "provable" sciences
have their margins of error too. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
practicem or one that's not generally accepted by professionals who would
know their accuracy better than the average layperson.
RE: Thomas | 7:05 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
IS Abraham dying and his wife taken captive and raped who knows what be more
important than not lying?
And as it has been argued here, it may not actually have been lie per se, when a greater perspective is used.
Obviously keeping abraham alive and his wife safe is of much more importantance than an inconsequential lie, where the truth serves only get him killed and his wife taken.
One must always look at the big picture, rather than see thing only through a very narrow perspective.
What I read here is a story of a loving God directing, guiding, and protecting one of his children, one his faithful followers, and his family from certain harm.
One must recognize, at times, Higher purposes, Greater needs, come first over individual actions. And from out very limited perspective we can't always see what that is.
And as it has been argued here, it may not actually have been lie per se, when a greater perspective is used.
Obviously keeping abraham alive and his wife safe is of much more importantance than an inconsequential lie, where the truth serves only get him killed and his wife taken.
One must always look at the big picture, rather than see thing only through a very narrow perspective.
What I read here is a story of a loving God directing, guiding, and protecting one of his children, one his faithful followers, and his family from certain harm.
One must recognize, at times, Higher purposes, Greater needs, come first over individual actions. And from out very limited perspective we can't always see what that is.
the truth | 9:41 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
to Thomas:
I don't see where is says God commanded Abraham to never to lie.
I do know he gave a commandment to moses (long after Abraham) to not bear false witness against another.
Abraham did not do this.
Nor did Abraham lie about his belief in God, his testimony of the Gospel, or any gospel or church doctrine. So no damning lies here that I can see.
But really why the nitpicking? Do you really expect perfection from imperfect people whether it be Abraham or Joseph Smith or your nieghbor.
Even Peter denied Christ three times, and Jesus gave him an opportunity for forgiveness.
Jonas ran away to avoid doing what God commanded him and he gained forgiveness.
And there many other examples of prophets, apostles and other church leaders not being perfect.
And yet you condemn Abraham for doing what God told him to do and him and saving him and his wife in the process.
You don't have to believe writing anaylsis experts, you can disregard any evidence, you can deny anything science may produce. YOu find any tiny little to give you reason not to believe
You are free to believe and do what you want.
I don't see where is says God commanded Abraham to never to lie.
I do know he gave a commandment to moses (long after Abraham) to not bear false witness against another.
Abraham did not do this.
Nor did Abraham lie about his belief in God, his testimony of the Gospel, or any gospel or church doctrine. So no damning lies here that I can see.
But really why the nitpicking? Do you really expect perfection from imperfect people whether it be Abraham or Joseph Smith or your nieghbor.
Even Peter denied Christ three times, and Jesus gave him an opportunity for forgiveness.
Jonas ran away to avoid doing what God commanded him and he gained forgiveness.
And there many other examples of prophets, apostles and other church leaders not being perfect.
And yet you condemn Abraham for doing what God told him to do and him and saving him and his wife in the process.
You don't have to believe writing anaylsis experts, you can disregard any evidence, you can deny anything science may produce. YOu find any tiny little to give you reason not to believe
You are free to believe and do what you want.
Thomas | 10:17 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
Guys, I have no problem with Abraham lying to Pharoah to save his life. What
*does* bother me a bit is that the Book of Abraham goes a step farther than
Genesis, which leaves God out of it: Abraham makes the decision to lie on his
own. The Book of Abraham actually has the lie originating with God.
I keep coming back to the idea that God is a God of truth, and cannot lie (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, Enos 1:6, Ether 3:12.)
Why not just leave things as they stood with the Genesis account? One explanation would simply be that the Book of Abraham account is just how it happened, and God *did* command Abraham to fib. A more skeptical interpretation would be that Joseph Smith was uncomfortable with shades of gray, and set out to rehabilitate the flawed but righteous Old Testament patriarchs into Book of Mormon-style Good Guys in unspotted white hats, and wrote up a divine sanction for what Abraham did. And there is one more even less favorable interpretation.
I keep coming back to the idea that God is a God of truth, and cannot lie (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, Enos 1:6, Ether 3:12.)
Why not just leave things as they stood with the Genesis account? One explanation would simply be that the Book of Abraham account is just how it happened, and God *did* command Abraham to fib. A more skeptical interpretation would be that Joseph Smith was uncomfortable with shades of gray, and set out to rehabilitate the flawed but righteous Old Testament patriarchs into Book of Mormon-style Good Guys in unspotted white hats, and wrote up a divine sanction for what Abraham did. And there is one more even less favorable interpretation.
Thomas | 10:42 p.m. Aug. 18, 2008
"To Thomas" -- I expect imperfection from men. I can, though, expect
perfection from God. He said so Himself.
"God is not a man, that he should lie."
I shouldn't keep having to say this: I am *not* condemning Abraham for lying to save his life. A lie can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, and part of the test of mortality is navigating a world that sometimes requires a hard choice between them. And frankly, the accounts of flawed but righteous men like Peter, Jonah, and Moses ring truer than stories of heroes who can do no wrong.
But one thing I see from Scripture is that Truth is something so sacred to God that a lie is one of the few things He promises He will never do. He may even kill you if it suits His purposes, but He won't lie to you. Period, full stop. I love that guarantee that God is absolutely trustworthy, and red flags go up when I see that promise being hedged and qualified.
You are free to believe me or not, but I have been seeking my whole life to make sure the foundation of my faith is truly firm.
"God is not a man, that he should lie."
I shouldn't keep having to say this: I am *not* condemning Abraham for lying to save his life. A lie can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, and part of the test of mortality is navigating a world that sometimes requires a hard choice between them. And frankly, the accounts of flawed but righteous men like Peter, Jonah, and Moses ring truer than stories of heroes who can do no wrong.
But one thing I see from Scripture is that Truth is something so sacred to God that a lie is one of the few things He promises He will never do. He may even kill you if it suits His purposes, but He won't lie to you. Period, full stop. I love that guarantee that God is absolutely trustworthy, and red flags go up when I see that promise being hedged and qualified.
You are free to believe me or not, but I have been seeking my whole life to make sure the foundation of my faith is truly firm.
Sarah | 8:28 a.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Thomas, you think that life is less sacred to Heavenly Father than the truth is?
Whatever would give you that idea? God doesn't lie, that's true. But
He doesn't murder either, and that's been sanctioned before in the
scriptures. Where, in any book in the scriptures, does He ever say that
He'll never ask us to break a commandment or two someday for a higher
purpose?
To Thomas | 10:40 a.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Abraham didn't lie. He instructed Sarah to say that she was his sister.
She WAS his half-sister. So, there is no command by God to lie. You must be
the same person that insists that God instructed Abraham to get himself a
concubine. God didn't. Instead the command came from an inpatient Sarah
and look at what that result is even now.
To: Non-Believer, 3:21 PM | 1:20 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
My question is convoluted?
No, in reality, it is not. It is very, very simple, actually.
The question is simply can God reveal truth to mankind through the Holy Ghost? Yes or no? You didn't answer my question so I will ask it again: Can God teach us truth through the Holy Spirit or not?
Second, you said that in order to have God, and/or the Holy Ghost communicate to you that you would have to believe in Him. Do you not understand that essentially what you are saying is that the ONLY things that can be "real" or "true" are things that you believe in? This defies reality. My 5 year old daughter does not "believe" in you, she doesn't even know you exist, but are you not real?
Third, you claim I have never "met" the Holy Ghost? Depends on your interpretation of "met". I have not met Him as man typically thinks of meeting another person; seeing a person and recognizing them as human, male/female, etc. However....I HAVE felt the Spirit's influence and power, and learned His wisdom and intellect on numerous occasions.
So, yes, I have met the Holy Ghost.
(more to follow)
No, in reality, it is not. It is very, very simple, actually.
The question is simply can God reveal truth to mankind through the Holy Ghost? Yes or no? You didn't answer my question so I will ask it again: Can God teach us truth through the Holy Spirit or not?
Second, you said that in order to have God, and/or the Holy Ghost communicate to you that you would have to believe in Him. Do you not understand that essentially what you are saying is that the ONLY things that can be "real" or "true" are things that you believe in? This defies reality. My 5 year old daughter does not "believe" in you, she doesn't even know you exist, but are you not real?
Third, you claim I have never "met" the Holy Ghost? Depends on your interpretation of "met". I have not met Him as man typically thinks of meeting another person; seeing a person and recognizing them as human, male/female, etc. However....I HAVE felt the Spirit's influence and power, and learned His wisdom and intellect on numerous occasions.
So, yes, I have met the Holy Ghost.
(more to follow)
To "Non-believer" (last) | 1:37 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
So the Book of Abraham doesn't teach us everything about the role of the
Holy Ghost, etc.
Who says it is supposed to?
The Book of Abraham teaches us many, many beautiful and true doctrines, but certainly not everything.
All truths will be made known to mankind in due time.
Good luck.
P.S. - Remember, my question of God teaching us through the Holy Ghost wasn't even a question of is God/Holy Ghost real, but rather, IF they are real, and IF they can teach mankind, then shouldn't we follow what THEY say even if it doesn't jive or can be proven through "hard science" or what we think are facts. THAT is the question.
Cheers.
Who says it is supposed to?
The Book of Abraham teaches us many, many beautiful and true doctrines, but certainly not everything.
All truths will be made known to mankind in due time.
Good luck.
P.S. - Remember, my question of God teaching us through the Holy Ghost wasn't even a question of is God/Holy Ghost real, but rather, IF they are real, and IF they can teach mankind, then shouldn't we follow what THEY say even if it doesn't jive or can be proven through "hard science" or what we think are facts. THAT is the question.
Cheers.
To "Cheers" | 3:16 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
No, the real question has nothing to do with God or the Holy Ghost. Your
statements are based on nothing more than "feelings." Same as when
people get goosebumps telling ghost stories around a campfire. That does not
mean ghosts exist. Nor do your feelings mean that either God or the Holy Ghost
exist.
The real question was whether Joseph Smith made up all the nonsense about the Book of Abraham. And the real answer is "yes." And that conclusion is based on real evidence, not superstitious feelings.
The real question was whether Joseph Smith made up all the nonsense about the Book of Abraham. And the real answer is "yes." And that conclusion is based on real evidence, not superstitious feelings.
Sounds Strange | 3:18 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
There is only one word that describes the BOA and that is FAKE!!!
Rebuttal from "Cheers" | 5:10 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Sir/Ma'am -
You are dodging my question. My statements are not just based on my "feelings".
The fact that I said that it is foolish to claim that what is "true" is only what one believes in has absolutely nothing to do with feelings or emotions. I even gave several factual examples to illustrate my point.
It boggles my mind when people on these message boards repeatedly claim that just because they don't believe something then it "cannot" be true. There is faith and then there is sure knowledge. A look around our world will show any intellectually honest person that what I said is true: something CAN be "real" or "true" even though one is not aware of it or does not acknowledge it's reality once they become aware of it.
And....what I experienced (the Holy Ghost) was far, far more than just "goosebumps". I've had those in spiritual settings and discounted them; too unreliable, since I've had them in non-spiritual settings as well. I'm talking about something drastically different and more powerful.
I wish you well in your pursuit of truth and happiness.
You are dodging my question. My statements are not just based on my "feelings".
The fact that I said that it is foolish to claim that what is "true" is only what one believes in has absolutely nothing to do with feelings or emotions. I even gave several factual examples to illustrate my point.
It boggles my mind when people on these message boards repeatedly claim that just because they don't believe something then it "cannot" be true. There is faith and then there is sure knowledge. A look around our world will show any intellectually honest person that what I said is true: something CAN be "real" or "true" even though one is not aware of it or does not acknowledge it's reality once they become aware of it.
And....what I experienced (the Holy Ghost) was far, far more than just "goosebumps". I've had those in spiritual settings and discounted them; too unreliable, since I've had them in non-spiritual settings as well. I'm talking about something drastically different and more powerful.
I wish you well in your pursuit of truth and happiness.
To "Slow S", Aug 18, 2:37PM | 5:23 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
I thank you for your admission of this truth.
Second...
What history, specifically, are you saying the LDS church has tried to change? To my knowledge, the Mormon church has never done this.
Please, give us your understanding of the facts of the event(s)....names, dates, places, who said so (would like more than 1 credible source and not just "somebody's journal"), possible motives of who is saying history was changed, what was supposedly changed, when it was changed, etc.
Second...
What history, specifically, are you saying the LDS church has tried to change? To my knowledge, the Mormon church has never done this.
Please, give us your understanding of the facts of the event(s)....names, dates, places, who said so (would like more than 1 credible source and not just "somebody's journal"), possible motives of who is saying history was changed, what was supposedly changed, when it was changed, etc.
Outside Observer | 7:06 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
You apologists sound like small children. ("Prove it!) Why don't you
study the history of your religion and then come back to the discussion once you
have an idea what you are talking about. We have done our homework. It is time
for you to do yours. Otherwise all you do is keep arguing like children, devoid
of the facts.
How scary for you ! | 8:29 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
quote: " The LDS doctrine is not easy and is sometimes a hard one to
swallow, but I do it for my family. "
Wow. How about, 'searching for the Truth', for the sake of your family.
quote from the article:
".... and people who start out loving the Prophet Joseph slowly lose their faith in him ...."
FAITH in Joseph?? Maybe thats the real prolem.
Wow. How about, 'searching for the Truth', for the sake of your family.
quote from the article:
".... and people who start out loving the Prophet Joseph slowly lose their faith in him ...."
FAITH in Joseph?? Maybe thats the real prolem.
exutahn | 8:50 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
why even bother with all this dicussion when the BOA is so obviously a fraud
Did You Consider.. | 9:01 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
The fact that the church admits it has difficulty answering questions about the
Book of Abraham ought to give you a clue that even THEY find Joseph Smith's
explanation implausible. If the book were truly translated from "reformed
Egyptian" as purported, there would be no difficulty in explaining it.
Answer for Non-Believer | 11:58 p.m. Aug. 19, 2008
Here is your explanation: Wherefore, my beloved brethren, have miracles ceased
because Christ hath ascended into heaven? Nay; neither have angels ceased to
minister unto the children of men, showing themselves unto them of strong faith
and a firm mind. And the office of their ministry is to call men unto
repentance, to prepare the way among the children of men, by declaring the word
of Christ unto the chosen vessels of the Lord, that they may bear testimony of
him. And by so doing, the Lord God prepareth the way that the residue of men may
have faith in Christ, that the Holy Ghost may have place in their hearts. God
will show unto you, with power and great glory at the last day, that these
things are true, and if they are true, has the day of miracles ceased? Or have
angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power
of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the
earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
Behold I say unto you, Nay.
Focus on content and results | 12:39 a.m. Aug. 20, 2008
I haven't seen here any serious consideration of the content of the BoA.
The description of Abraham's dream to be a righteous father, etc. in verse
2, the account of the priestly rituals and sacrifices, the War in Heaven,
account of the spiritual creation of the earth (to name too few) are beautifully
written and feel like scripture, fit well with the Bible and shed new light on
the characters involved (without contradiction).
They inspire me to do much more and to treat others as brothers and sisters.
I too have been to many museums, travelled in Egypt (I live in Europe), and find some things I do not understand, but much more that I like and feel comfortable with in this book.
To me Joseph Smith was an inspired genius, like Mozart or Einstein. We could focus on their personalities and oddities (as some have) which for some detracts from the beauty and complexity of their works.
I don't find satisfaction in things that tear down the good things that pure religion does. I would guess many of the those who say they've left would say the same in moments of reflection.
They inspire me to do much more and to treat others as brothers and sisters.
I too have been to many museums, travelled in Egypt (I live in Europe), and find some things I do not understand, but much more that I like and feel comfortable with in this book.
To me Joseph Smith was an inspired genius, like Mozart or Einstein. We could focus on their personalities and oddities (as some have) which for some detracts from the beauty and complexity of their works.
I don't find satisfaction in things that tear down the good things that pure religion does. I would guess many of the those who say they've left would say the same in moments of reflection.
Curiosity | 1:06 a.m. Aug. 20, 2008
Where is your curiosity??? So many members seem to lack a drive to really search
and understand this great book, while many non members seem to stop at the first
hint of contradiction. We seem to be a people lacking in deep, driving
curiosity. A search is something that continues forever and is not placated
easily. You will not find the truth or any of the rich things of life if you
delight in a quick fix.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- RSL will play for MLS Cup tonight 3:06 a.m.
- Jazz outlast Pistons in overtime 3:06 a.m.
- Utah Utes whip SDSU 3:05 a.m.
- BYU records with win 3:05 a.m.
- RSL dancing with soccer stars 3:04 a.m.
- Cougars turn focus to dreaded rivals 3:04 a.m.
- Dixie State campus briefs 3:03 a.m.
- Weber State campus briefs 3:02 a.m.
- UVU campus briefs 3:01 a.m.
- BYU campus briefs 2:59 a.m.
- Glenn Beck to enter politics?
- Can BYU throw vs. Air Force?
- Cougars cruise to victory in Hawaii
- Huntsman blasts media over trip
- Police link alcohol to murder
- Christian leaders not backing down
- BYU records with win
- TCU still has a chance
- Orem man acquitted in tot's death
- Religion cited in deportation fight
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
192 - Palin plans tour stop in Utah173
- Glenn Beck to enter politics?129
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified122
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case103
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.100
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio98
- BYU records with win95
- Utes knock off rival Aggies93
- Huntsman pleased with Obama87
Latest comments
Beck is extremely smart, he is selling books and is very popular on TV. All...
@Mick, the Federal Govt is run by corporations through contributions and...
Lets bond together and hope for a REAL celebration SUnday night, can hardly...
I was on the playground too and some teachers came out and called us all to...
B.Y.U. has been a consistent a top 25 ranked winner under Max Hall. Hall has...
Did Timp win four in a row or 4 in 4 years?
You have a lot of growing up to do, It seems like you have not cxperienced...
The proposed ethics law puts roughly the same burden on a legislator that a...
Hall ACTUALLY broke the all timme wins record vs WYO last week. I guess...
Sounds to me like Kraig Powell may be a candidate for resignation. So long,...
Advertisements
Jesus asks Simon Bar-jona, "...whom say ye that I am?" and Simon replies, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Then Jesus replies, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."
This, my friends, is how I know. Not that God spoke to me in words, but through spiritual experiences that I have had. I can't explain it other than I�ve experienced feelings of joy beyond anything I have ever felt; feelings of warmth and fulfillment. Not the same feelings of joy I felt when I was married, or when my first child was born. It is different than that. This negates all the doubts and concerns over the so called "evidences" against the church.
Flesh and blood (i.e. academic knowledge, apologists, archeological evidence) will not reveal the truth of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or any other aspect of the LDS church, but the very God in heaven.