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.

[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 fair 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.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

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 fair 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.

I understand this point of view, and agree it is mainstream.

However, perhaps we are not clear as to the "translation" method of the prophet. It is clear to me that JS did not academically translate along traditional methods. Because of that, I do not know phenomenally how it functioned. Did it act upon his subconscious triggering subconsicous understandings and thereby providing a theologically consistent document, but not necessarily providing the only translation possible?

[Chapel-Hill-Coug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

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 fair 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.

Wow, who knew the bible situation was that grave. I wholeheartedly disagree that the bible is so full of problems that it is not trustworthy. Sure there are a lot of variants between manuscripts but only a small percentage of these are "theologically significant variants". And in these cases, we *usually* have enough evidence to ascertain what the original reading was. The case is NOT as bad as you're making it out to be. If you believe the Bible was inspired (an article of faith comes to mind) then don't worry, get a correct translation and it will be of plenty value to you. [edit:] What you said may be true of the KJV, but that's we nobody uses that translation anymore. We have so much more evidence now on which to base a decent text.

[Indy Coug]

Given the presumption that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, the mechanics and particulars of the translation are irrelevant. If Joseph Smith was truly a prophet of God and was truly inspired, do you think God would have let him put down anything that was that off the mark?

What I find interesting is the number of people that claim they believe, while at the same time essentially denying or downplaying as much of what Joseph Smith did or said in his lifetime as having anything to do with prophetic powers or gifts of the Spriit (not necessarily aimed at you, Archaea).

It's my opinion that too many people get caught up in the minutae of things, of which they have a very incomplete knowledge base to build upon to begin with, and thereby lose sight of the fact that God demands that we live by faith (not having a perfect knowledge of things) and we can know of their truthfulness by personal application and personal revelation.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/alma/32/21,26,29,34-35#21

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Given the presumption that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, the mechanics and particulars of the translation are irrelevant. If Joseph Smith was truly a prophet of God and was truly inspired, do you think God would have let him put down anything that was that off the mark?

What I find interesting is the number of people that claim they believe, while at the same time essentially denying or downplaying as much of what Joseph Smith did or said in his lifetime as having anything to do with prophetic powers or gifts of the Spriit (not necessarily aimed at you, Archaea).

It's my opinion that too many people get caught up in the minutae of things, of which they have a very incomplete knowledge base to build upon to begin with, and thereby lose sight of the fact that God demands that we live by faith (not having a perfect knowledge of things) and we can know of their truthfulness by personal application and personal revelation.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/alma/32/21,26,29,34-35#21

It is important to my mind so that I understand what it is exactly that I know. I don't fully understand how the Spirit works upon me, so when I'm feeling the burning of the bosom, what aspects is the Spirit confirming to me. If I can understand the mechanics, then I'll better understand what JS is giving us.

I believe God allows a lot of error to reach us. It is important that our minds sift through it and apply it faithfully but carefully.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I believe God allows a lot of error to reach us. It is important that our minds sift through it and apply it faithfully but carefully.

What's the purpose of a prophet if what he relates in the guise of the mind and will of the Lord is in reality some nonsignificant proportion less than that?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

What's the purpose of a prophet if what he relates in the guise of the mind and will of the Lord is in reality some nonsignificant proportion less than that?

That's what I want to figure out. There could be a purpose to it.