Salvation in the scriptures, the born again movement

[Notaclue]

I believe what the Bible says and believe that it is correct. There is only one God and Jesus is one with Him. They are not different entities.

I believe God is everywhere:
Ps.139:8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, thou art there.
9 If I take the wings of the morning, And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, And thy right hand shall hold me.
11 If I say, Surely the darkness shall overwhelm me, And the light about me shall be night;
12 Even the darkness hideth not from thee, But the night shineth as the day: The darkness and the light are both alike to thee.
I believe the Father is outside because He is prayed to:
Mt 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye. Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

I believe there is no scripture that says God is not in Hell.

I believe saying He is in one place does not mean He isn't in other places.

4There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.


6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.


Peace.

 

[Riders]

He translates himself,reincarnates himself in other dietys as well,Buddha,Harri Krishna

 

[Ben Avraham]

Salvation in the Scriptures the Born-Again Movement

It depends on what salvation in the Scripture you are talking about. The Scriptures speaks about two kinds of salvation:

1. Personal salvation and;

2. Universal salvation.

Only universal salvation is free; personal salvation is as expensive as the kind of transgression committed against the Law.

Universal salvation is the one promised to Noah through the Noahide Covenant which the Lord established with all Mankind. Soon after the Flood, the Lord promised Noah never to allow another catastrophe the size of the Flood as all living beings, except for Noah's family, had suffered universal destruction. What about if Mankind turned again as evil as at the time of Noah? The Lord had to raise a new people from the loins of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the pledge or assurance to His promise of universal salvation for Mankind. Israel had risen. Now, as long as Israel remained as a People before the Lord forever, the earth would remain seed-time and harvest and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night would not cease. In other words, as long as the natural laws functioned properly, Mankind was saved; freely saved. (Gen. 8:21,22)

Prophet Jeremiah must have read the above text and connected the Lord's pledge with the permanence of Israel as a People before the Lord forever as long as the natural laws functioned properly, thus, Israel would guarantee the Lord's promise of universal salvation of Mankind. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)

Reading the Christian NT the other day, I came about John 4:22 and I was reminded that Jesus must have read both texts above; the one of Genesis and that of Jeremiah and concluded that indeed salvation comes from the Jews. From the Jews, he said, and not from one among the Jews.

Now, for personal salvation, the bill would have to be paid according to the transgression of the Law; the law of cause and effect; some times as expensive as the loss of life itself. This kind of salvation is so serious that, as Jesus himself said, if we come to the Temple to plead for salvation and we are reminded that some one has an issue with us, we must leave all behind and go set things right with our neighbor and only then return to the altar to plead for salvation. (Mat. 5:23,24)

 

[Prestor John]

I don't believe the Book of Mormon is worth the paper it's printed on.

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

 

[Ben Avraham]

~;> so if someone is goin to ask us we would tell that only the father who is good and his son cannot lie about it becaused he's a good son of god and if the father is god then the son is also a god and a good god always respect and gave praise and glory first unto his good father.

You say above that, "if the father is god, then the son is also god." That's wrong reasoning because, according to Exodus 4:22,23 the Lord said, "Israel is My Son; so let My Son go that He may serve Me." Does it mean that Israel is also God? It is okay if you admit you made a mistake but, you must admit it.

 

[omega2xx]

Heres a scripture that describes salvation in the bible.

Romans 10:9-10 - That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (Read More...)


The born again movement started in the 60s according to my grandmother who was born and raised up in the Baptist church. My Mom was too.

Born again is not a movement, it is a Biblical doctrine and it started way befor the 60's

The Baptist and Community churches, nondenominational and many bible churches teach that responding to an alter all and accepting Jesus as Lord into your heart is how you get saved and you must respond to an alter call to do it. If you do it at home you must express it as and use the accepting Jesus as Lord into your heart.

That is only partially true, The only Biblical requirement to be saved is the ones in Romans, you just mentioned. It can be done anywhere and the only requirement is that the person be sincere.

This is not in the bible, it says nothing about accepting Jesus as Lord it says you must believe on him confess him as Lord and the Trinity isn't in there it doesn't say pray to him either or that hes God. ANyways forget I said that, that's another argument. But talking about the born again movement.

Believing and confessdin requires accepting Him.

My Grandmother Mommie Ingram told me that before the 60s, the way they got saved was believing on Jesus repenting of sins and responding to an alter call to get baptized and join the church, accepting Jesus wasn't a part of it. If you join the church publically your making a public expression of faith on Jesus.

That was the Baptist understanding then and probably still is, but It is not Biblical. Many walk down the isle out of pressure, not out of sincerity.

SOme would say that I'm being picky and theres nothing wrong with the idea of using the sinners prayer or accepting Jesus as Lord to express what the bibles talking about that. Ok I agree but theres a problem.

A lot of Baptists and many I know believe not so much that you have to belong to the Baptist church but that you have to express yourself at an alter call and use the expression accept Jesus and respond to an alter call to be saved.

Nothing wrong with being picky in religious matters. Details are important. Baptism is our main public testimony. There is no pressure when one wants to be baptized.

They also say including my sister who admits she maybe wrong but many wrongly believe United Methodists Catholics Episcapalian, Christian churches and the like wont go to heaven because they don't accept Jesus as lord and offer an Alter Call to accept Jesus.

The denomination is irrelevant, accepting Jesus is not.

SO my problem isn't so much the actual act of using that alter call as much as it is that its just not required by the bible, Faith in Jesus and God saves you.Repentance also.

That is Biblical.

SO my issue is that they teach it as something that is required to get saved.

My second problem is this. The born again movement started making people get resaved over and over again and respond to alter calls over and over after they sinned. My Mom quit the Baptist church because she use to respond over and over to alter calls and then go to the beer store on the way home and get drunk( she was a recovering alcoholic) again.

When one is born physically, they cant be reborn; once one is bonspiritually, they can't be reborn.

And she also wouldn't go back because after she got clean and sober at AA,she accepted the fact that she got saved at the age of 8 and has been saved her whole life, once saved always saved.

That is Biblical

The churches are teaching people to get saved and resaved and its wrong, she said I'm not going back to church and getting resaved which is what they would require me to do I'm already saved.

Good for her, but she might consider attending a church that doesn't teach you need to be resaved.

 

[omega2xx]

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

It is not necessary to read it. It is only necessary to look at what it teaches and if it contradicts the only writing inspired by God, it isn't worth the paper its written on.

 

[omega2xx]

I believe she took the easy way out. I can understand that but wonder if Jesus would have taken the easy way or would he have gone to the cross for those church members.

What Jesus did was universal, not for churches alone. The cross made salvation possilble,but it did not give everyone a ticket for bus going to heaven.

 

[omega2xx]

I believe I was also. My church was an American Baptist church.

I believe that is not Biblical. There is no requirement for an altar call or using the right words. I was saved in private on my porch sitting in a rocking chair and I don't recall calling on His name but simply accepting Him as my savior. Confession with my mouth did not take place until 7 years later and at that time I was baptized but I was just as saved during those 7 years. For me it was not a belief but an act of will.

I don't believe this verse is saying how to be saved but simply reveals what salvation is. The person who is saved confesses by mouth that he is after having been saved. It is like saying a cow moos. The cow isn't a cow because it moos. It moos because it is a cow.

I believe I agree that one need not believe in the Trinity to be saved but Jesus does see a lack of belief in the Trinity as having a false image of God. He doesn't want His people worshiping false images.

I believe we are not saved by faith but by grace as per this verse:
Eph. 2:8 for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not of works, that no man should glory.
However like any gift, it has to be received.

I believe this is nonsense. A person goes through sanctification which can be a process. It is a sign of the times that people want instant gratification. It is something I hear from my Southern Baptist pastor that one must inspect the fruit to see if a person is truly saved or not. This doesn't work with Alcoholism, since technically it is not so much a sin as a weakness of the flesh. The question should not be "is the person becoming drunk" but rather "is the person seeking help not to be drunk." And a corollary to that is "what is the church doing to help the person be sober."

I believe that is not necessarily the case. An 8 year old can make the statement and then have a change of mind as the mind matures. I would say it was more likely an acceptance as an adult that would serve as salvation.

While you are basically right, the sincere confession of Jesus at 8, saves.

 

[Prestor John]

It is not necessary to read it. It is only necessary to look at what it teaches and if it contradicts the only writing inspired by God, it isn't worth the paper its written on.

How can you come to know what it teaches or if it contradicts anything if you have not read it?

Don't you hate it when an atheists or someone who hates Christianity claims the Bible says something that it doesn't?

Wouldn't you have an issue with someone making a false claim about the Word of God without ever having read it?

I have read the Book of Mormon and I claim that it does not contradict the Bible or any other true revelation from God.

 

[omega2xx]

How can you come to know what it teaches or if it contradicts anything if you have not read it?

I have a pamphlet that tells what several denominations believe that is contrary to the Bible. In Mormonism, it references some of the books of the BOM. It only references the BOM once but I assume the other contradictions come from teachings from the BOM.

Don't you hate it when an atheists or someone who hates Christianity claims the Bible says something that it doesn't?

Wouldn't you have an issue with someone making a false claim about the Word of God without ever having read it?

Not necessarily. I had 2 Mormons come to my house for several weeks and we discussed our differences. From that I know some of their theology. One example is that they believe salvation is based on works plus faith and that we can lose our salvation. Both of those are contradictions to what the Bible teaches.

I have read the Book of Mormon and I claim that it does not contradict the Bible or any other true revelation from God.

Then you have not studied the Bible enough to recognize the contradictions. Do the 2 examples i just gave come from the BOM?

I will give you one example that does come from the BOM---Adam, fell that men might be, and the men are, that t hey might have joy---II Nephi 2:25.

Men were before Adam sinned. His fall did not cause man to have joy. Do you think Adam and Eve had joy when their first born became a murderer and murdered his brother? Did Cain have joy when he was cast out of the presence of God? Lets look at what he said---My punishment is too great to bear---You have driven me this day from the face of the ground and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. Where do you see the joy in those words?

 

[Prestor John]

I have a pamphlet that tells what several denominations believe that is contrary to the Bible.

Wow. I would never judge a religion based solely on a pamphlet. A pamphlet that was not even made by said religion!

In Mormonism, it references some of the books of the BOM. It only references the BOM once but I assume the other contradictions come from teachings from the BOM.

So, your judgment of the Book of Mormon and the LDS Church is based off of a pamphlet written by a third party and an assumption?

Not necessarily. I had 2 Mormons come to my house for several weeks and we discussed our differences. From that I know some of their theology.

I am having an issue believing if this story is true because I know that a key principle of teaching employed by LDS missionaries is to have people read the Book of Mormon.

So, either you are making a false claim now about meeting with two missionaries or you made a false claim to those missionaries about reading from the Book of Mormon, when you did not.

I know that LDS missionaries would not have wasted “several weeks” of time talking with someone who refused to read from the Book of Mormon, so I am inclined to believe that you never actually met with them or you did but lied to them about reading from the Book of Mormon.

One example is that they believe salvation is based on works plus faith and that we can lose our salvation.

You either misunderstood them or they explained this inadequately. (Or you never really met with them to begin with)

We sometimes use blanket terms like “salvation” in reference to certain things that actually don’t affect salvation at all.

So, let me clear up this little confusion.

We do not believe that works have anything to do with salvation. Performing good works is a means of becoming sanctified and obtaining eventual perfection, not salvation.

Everyone will be saved from both sin and death. This is a promise from God that has been made possible through the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

However, how and when we will be saved depends on what we do in our lives.

Also, being saved from sin and death does not automatically guarantee entrance into God’s Kingdom.

Both of those are contradictions to what the Bible teaches.

Yes they are. Fortunately, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does not believe in or teach those things.

You either heard wrong or never actually met with any missionaries.

Then you have not studied the Bible enough to recognize the contradictions.

This is a very hypocritical thing for you to say considering that you don’t even know what the Book of Mormon teaches because you have not read it.

Claiming that I have not studied enough when you refuse to even read the book you are criticizing?

Before you go looking for that mote in my eye, you should pull that huge beam out of yours.

How's that for a Bible reference. Or how about when the Bible taught that people should not bear false witness? Like claiming to have met with missionaries when you never did or telling the missionaries you read from the Book of Mormon when you never did?

Can I claim that you have not studied the Bible enough because you have failed to live by these teachings?

Do the 2 examples i just gave come from the BOM?

No. It sounds like they came from your imagination.

I will give you one example that does come from the BOM---Adam, fell that men might be, and the men are, that t hey might have joy---II Nephi 2:25.

Men were before Adam sinned. His fall did not cause man to have joy. Do you think Adam and Eve had joy when their first born became a murderer and murdered his brother? Did Cain have joy when he was cast out of the presence of God? Lets look at what he said---My punishment is too great to bear---You have driven me this day from the face of the ground and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. Where do you see the joy in those words?

I'm going to ignore your silly example and ask you a question - Do you have any modicum of joy in your life?

 

[omega2xx]

Wow. I would never judge a religion based solely on a pamphlet. A pamphlet that was not even made by said religion!

The pamphlet give several examples of wher Mormon writings are contradicted by the Bib le.

So, your judgment of the Book of Mormon and the LDS Church is based off of a pamphlet written by a third party and an assumption?

Get real, You know what pamphlets are. The one I have gives EXAMPLES of where Mormon theology is contradicted by the Bible. and they are not assumptions, They ar direct quotes from some of your writings. I only need one example for me to reject Mormonism. I have over 30.

I am having an issue believing if this story is true because I know that a key principle of teaching employed by LDS missionaries is to have people read the Book of Mormon.

I could couldn't care less what you believe. You are speaking from ignorance. Is it Mormon theology to call people a liar when they are not aware of the facts.

So, either you are making a false claim now about meeting with two missionaries or you made a false claim to those missionaries about reading from the Book of Mormon, when you did not.[/QUOTE]

If you are going to keep calling me a liar, go back to the playvround with the rest of the third graders.

]I know that LDS missionaries would not have wasted “several weeks” of time talking with someone who refused to read from the Book of Mormon, so I am inclined to believe that you never actually met with them or you did but lied to them about reading from the Book of Mormon.

You either misunderstood them or they explained this inadequately. (Or you never really met with them to begin with)

We sometimes use blanket terms like “salvation” in reference to certain things that actually don’t affect salvation at all.

So, let me clear up this little confusion.

We do not believe that works have anything to do with salvation. Performing good works is a means of becoming sanctified and obtaining eventual perfection, not salvation.

Everyone will be saved from both sin and death. This is a promise from God that has been made possible through the Atoning Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

However, how and when we will be saved depends on what we do in our lives.

Also, being saved from sin and death does not automatically guarantee entrance into God’s Kingdom.

Yes they are. Fortunately, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does not believe in or teach those things.

You either heard wrong or never actually met with any missionaries.

This is a very hypocritical thing for you to say considering that you don’t even know what the Book of Mormon teaches because you have not read it.

Claiming that I have not studied enough when you refuse to even read the book you are criticizing?

Before you go looking for that mote in my eye, you should pull that huge beam out of yours.

How's that for a Bible reference. Or how about when the Bible taught that people should not bear false witness? Like claiming to have met with missionaries when you never did or telling the missionaries you read from the Book of Mormon when you never did?

Can I claim that you have not studied the Bible enough because you have failed to live by these teachings?

No. It sounds like they came from your imagination.

I'm going to ignore your silly example and ask you a question - Do you have any modicum of joy in your life?

If you want to discuss our differences fine, but I am not going to put with your ignorance by calling me a liar when you were not there. Either you accept what I say or go peddle your ignorance somewhere else.

 

[knh777]

Heres a scripture that describes salvation in the bible.

Romans 10:9-10 - That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (Read More...)


The born again movement started in the 60s according to my grandmother who was born and raised up in the Baptist church. My Mom was too.

The Baptist and Community churches, nondenominational and many bible churches teach that responding to an alter all and accepting Jesus as Lord into your heart is how you get saved and you must respond to an alter call to do it. If you do it at home you must express it as and use the accepting Jesus as Lord into your heart.

This is not in the bible, it says nothing about accepting Jesus as Lord it says you must believe on him confess him as Lord and the Trinity isn't in there it doesn't say pray to him either or that hes God. ANyways forget I said that, that's another argument. But talking about the born again movement.

My Grandmother Mommie Ingram told me that before the 60s, the way they got saved was believing on Jesus repenting of sins and responding to an alter call to get baptized and join the church, accepting Jesus wasn't a part of it. If you join the church publically your making a public expression of faith on Jesus.

SOme would say that I'm being picky and theres nothing wrong with the idea of using the sinners prayer or accepting Jesus as Lord to express what the bibles talking about that. Ok I agree but theres a problem.

A lot of Baptists and many I know believe not so much that you have to belong to the Baptist church but that you have to express yourself at an alter call and use the expression accept Jesus and respond to an alter call to be saved.

They also say including my sister who admits she maybe wrong but many wrongly believe United Methodists Catholics Episcapalian, Christian churches and the like wont go to heaven because they don't accept Jesus as lord and offer an Alter Call to accept Jesus.

SO my problem isn't so much the actual act of using that alter call as much as it is that its just not required by the bible, Faith in Jesus and God saves you.Repentance also.

SO my issue is that they teach it as something that is required to get saved.

My second problem is this. The born again movement started making people get resaved over and over again and respond to alter calls over and over after they sinned. My Mom quit the Baptist church because she use to respond over and over to alter calls and then go to the beer store on the way home and get drunk( she was a recovering alcoholic) again.

And she also wouldn't go back because after she got clean and sober at AA,she accepted the fact that she got saved at the age of 8 and has been saved her whole life, once saved always saved.

The churches are teaching people to get saved and resaved and its wrong, she said I'm not going back to church and getting resaved which is what they would require me to do I'm already saved.

I hope to clear up a bit. "The Born Again" movement isn't a movement of the 60s.
Jesus said "you must be born again to enter Heaven" So its important.

The movement you speak of was an awesome revival. Where people realized religion had been hijacked and the Spirit stifled by doctrines of men.

So it was in many examples a work of the Spirit. Reviving the fervent following that Jesus had called us to.

The chant of the sinners prayer has gotten misrepresented. Believe it or not, the ones going down many times where slightly on the right track. And its preferred over the thought we prayed now saved.

Somewhere between these is truth.
There is a process.

To even be saved the Spirit needs to reveal Him in our understanding. And through that we begin and become born again. Sometimes you have to seek Him everday for a few days showing yourself mostly, that you counted the cost and are willing to take a step of faith and make the exchange.

Thats entering into Covenant. The Seal of the Spirit is a good faith deposit in response to contract signed in the blood of Christ. He asks everyone to count the cost, its our good faith deposit. And that deposit is repentance. Deciding to walk in a different directon leaving the love of the world behind.

That willingness to lose everything and declare for Christ and the hope of Him by faith counted as righteosness. As Abraham and the patriarchs we enter covenant in the same way. By faith we are of His Kingdom, and attonement is the Lamb He provided and then its an exchange of covenant.

Though we walk in flesh, our heart hungers for His goodness and love in our hearts as is written. And the deposit of the Spirit is like a rod of correction that moves to bring us back to our contract agreement whenever we fall down. And in repentance and rest we are saved.

The video below is a great example of the revival by the Holy Spirit in the 60s and 70s. Its about a legacy of one of my favorite inspirations.

And realize also, God brought revival like this every couple of generations. It was cyclic. He would revive them, and then they would drift, then He would revive then they would drift, like in the reformation and then some in 1800s 1900s and even in 2000s.

God has done this reviving since Christ abd actually also in Israel with every prophet and good and bad king raised. Because man drifts and forgets, and the Spirit refreshes with revival.
Mankind is easily deceived. And flesh is weak so many generations let themselves fall asleep.

 

[knh777]

I hope to clear up a bit. "The Born Again" movement isn't a movement of the 60s.
Jesus said "you must be born again to enter Heaven" So its important.

The Jesus movement of the 60s and 70s was an awesome revival. Where people realized that true religion of Christianity had been hijacked by stale sleeping and sometimes dead churches and denominations. And the The Spirit of Truth was hindered and stifled by doctrines of men.

It was in many ways an example of how the Spirit moves, and brought to remembrance the truth of the Gospel and who Jesus really is, not limited by preconceived ideas from a God in a box religion. Reviving the fervent following that Jesus had called us to. And renewing excitement and life in knowing and sharing Jesus Christ.

The chant of the sinners prayer has gotten misrepresented. Believe it or not, the ones going down many times where slightly on the right track. And its preferred over the thought we prayed now saved.

Somewhere between these is truth.
There is a process.

To even be saved the Spirit needs to reveal Him in our understanding. And through that we begin and become born again. Sometimes you have to seek Him everday for a few days showing yourself mostly, that you counted the cost and are willing to take a step of faith and make the exchange.

Thats entering into Covenant. The Seal of the Spirit is a good faith deposit in response to contract signed in the blood of Christ. He asks everyone to count the cost, its our good faith deposit. And that deposit is repentance. Deciding to walk in a different directon leaving the love of the world behind.

That willingness to lose everything and declare for Christ and the hope of Him by faith counted as righteosness. As Abraham and the patriarchs we enter covenant in the same way. By faith we are of His Kingdom, and attonement is the Lamb He provided and then its an exchange of covenant.

Though we walk in flesh, our heart hungers for His goodness and love in our hearts as is written. And the deposit of the Spirit is like a rod of correction that moves to bring us back to our contract agreement whenever we fall down. And in repentance and rest we are saved.

The video below is a great example of the revival by the Holy Spirit in the 60s and 70s. Its about a legacy of one of my favorite inspirations.

And realize also, God brought revival like this every couple of generations. It was cyclic. He would revive them, and then they would drift, then He would revive then they would drift, like in the reformation and then some in 1800s 1900s and even in 2000s.

God has done this reviving since Christ abd actually also in Israel with every prophet and good and bad king raised. Because man drifts and forgets, and the Spirit refreshes with revival.

Mankind is easily deceived. And flesh is weak so many generations let themselves fall asleep.

 

[knh777]

 

[e.r.m.]

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

Not much of it, but I have discussed it with several very passionate Mormon "elders" and one in particular believed that proven facts are immaterial because "truth is stronger than facts" that contradict mormonism and "God tells him truth." I heard another one who claimed there is zero archeological evidence for the lammonites travel through the U.S. because God "hid" it all so we can go completely on faith and I've read quite a bit on the seer stone Mr. Smith to not believe in him
If God was "restoring" the first century church through him, why would God have to add several new books; the book of mormom, doctrine and covenants, and pearl of great price? Why not just point out to Joseph Smith what parts of the Bible the churches of his day had forsaken and what he should call people to obey? Those books weren't part of the original church, that wasn't "restoring", that was adding.

 

[Katzpur]

Not much of it, but I have discussed it with several very passionate Mormon "elders" and one in particular believed that proven facts are immaterial because "truth is stronger than facts" that contradict mormonism and "God tells him truth." I heard another one who claimed there is zero archeological evidence for the lammonites travel through the U.S. because God "hid" it all so we can go completely on faith...

Well, I can't relate at all to Mormons like these, so I'll just remind you that not all Mormons think this way.

If God was "restoring" the first century church through him, why would God have to add several new books; the book of mormom, doctrine and covenants, and pearl of great price? Why not just point out to Joseph Smith what parts of the Bible the churches of his day had forsaken and what he should call people to obey? Those books weren't part of the original church, that wasn't "restoring", that was adding.

The "Bible" as we know it wasn't part of the "original Church" either. What Mormonism is claiming to "restore" are doctrines that were once taught and believed by the earliest Christians, but which either weren't recorded at all or were simply lost or which, for some other reason, weren't included in the Bible we've had for the past several hundred years. So God didn't "have to add several new books." That's not the issue at all. The issue is that we believe that Jesus Christ established His Church as part of His ministry, that after His death and the deaths of His Apostles, men changed it. Both the doctrines that were originally taught and the organizational structure of His Church evolved over time to become something quite different from "the original." For someone who believes the Bible to have essentially existed in its present form since the very beginning and who believes everything God wants us to know is contained within its pages, it's only logical to ask why God would "have to add several new books." But that's not how we Mormons see these other books.

 

[Katzpur]

I don't believe the Book of Mormon is worth the paper it's printed on.

That's kind of like throwing out the baby with the bath water. If you can find nothing worthwhile in the Book of Mormon, you are obviously looking at it with blinders on. As a Mormon, I can find truth and knowledge in scriptures other than my own. I find the Baha'i scriptures to be really beautiful. I don't have to agree with everything another church teaches to be able to find value in the parts of their beliefs that are true. The Book of Mormon has a great many things in it that, if you were to read them in the Bible, you'd agree wholeheartedly with. I think it's not so much what the Book of Mormon says that you find so objectionable as the fact that it exists in the first place.

 

[omega2xx]

Well, I can't relate at all to Mormons like these, so I'll just remind you that not all Mormons think this way.

The "Bible" as we know it wasn't part of the "original Church" either.

Neither was the BOM and some of the NT was available while Paul was still living. The churches use to share his letters, making that part of the original teachings of the church. We know of 2 of his letters being shared and there was probably many more.

What Mormonism is claiming to "restore" are doctrines that were once taught and believed by the earliest Christians, but which either weren't recorded at all or were simply lost or which, for some other reason, weren't included in the Bible we've had for the past several hundred years. So God didn't "have to add several new books." That's not the issue at all. The issue is that we believe that Jesus Christ established His Church as part of His ministry, that after His death and the deaths of His Apostles, men changed it. Both the doctrines that were originally taught and the organizational structure of His Church evolved over time to become something quite different from "the original." For someone who believes the Bible to have essentially existed in its present form since the very beginning and who believes everything God wants us to know is contained within its pages, it's only logical to ask why God would "have to add several new books." But that's not how we Mormons see these other books.[/QUOTE]

That is your excuse for trying to give the BOM more authority than the Bible. Which came way before the BOM, which makes the BOM added scripture in disobedience to God's word. You have absolutely no evidence that His disciples changed anything. They certainly had more integrity than the founder of your religion. You should be ashamed of your self for suggesting such a thing.

AT least we have the mss for the NT, over 23,000. No one has eve seen the plates J Smith claims to have gotten from God. How convenient.