A Bible. a Bible, we have a KJV Bible

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Chapel-Hill-Coug

You know, there is quite an irony here, since the book of Mormon is so theologically conservative, that it is, well, biblical. There is nothing in the BOM that doesn't tie back to the theology that Joseph knew from the KJV bible. So I guess in the terms of the discussion so far, yes, you could say that the BOM is redundant.

Joseph's theology doesn't become otherwise until the late 1830s when his view of the godhead starts changing. I guess he remembered his vision then or something, I don't know. Until then it was very protestant and very biblical.

The value the BOM has over the Bible is that the pedigree of it is unquestionable, assuming you accept Joseph Smith as a prophet and that he was truthful about how he obtained the plates.

The records that comprise the BOM were for over 1,000 years in the hands of men entrusted by God to preserve them until their compilation by Mormon/Moroni.

There are no questions about the origin of the "source documents". There are no questions over translation issues. There are no questions over theological malfeasance on the part of those that wrote, translated or transcribed the records.

There may be a far amount of doctrinal redundancy between the Bible and the BOM, but the Bible's history is so questionable in so many circumstances that it's difficult to trust much of what is said in there in the absence of the substantiation provided by the BOM.

The reverse of that is NOT the case.