Skip to comments.What Mormons Think of the Bible
Posted on 06/23/2009 3:47:53 PM PDT by delacoert
Official Mormon Statements about the Bible:
The Mormon church teaches that the Bible has been corrupted and does not contain the fullness of the gospel. This is reflected in one of their Articles of Faith which states: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly" (Pearl of Great Price).
Comparisons made by Mormon Leaders between the Bible and Book of Mormon. In contrast to the Bible, Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is perfect because it was translated perfectly (miraculously) as reflected in the second half of the same Article of Faith: "...we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God [but without any qualifications as to translation accuracy]" (Pearl of Great Price).
The real question is, what do Mormons think of the Rosetta stone? You’re familiar with the story I assume?
No, I’m not. I’m interested to find out though.
As a dues-paying member of “The Great and Abominable Church” (Catholic if you haven’t guessed), I resemble that last remark.
OBTW, my Protestant brothers and sisters needn’t feel left out; the Mormon GA’s refer to all of you as the “lewd daughters” of TGAAC.
“A man has to believe in something. I believe I’ll have another drink.”
My last name is Moore, I’m a man (the last time I checked), and I have no problems with the Bible!
Trust us, we feel the love ;-)
Joseph Smith claimed: "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was more correct than any book on earth,
And I stand by that statement! :-)
The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th Edition)
"This thoroughly revised edition of Bruce M. Metzger's classic work is the most up-to-date manual available for the textual criticism of the New Testament. The Text of the New Testament, Fourth Edition, has been invigorated by the addition of Bart D. Ehrman--author of numerous best-selling books on the New Testament--as a coauthor. This revision brings the discussion of such important matters as the early Greek manuscripts and methods of textual criticism up to date, integrating recent research findings and approaches into the body of the text (as opposed to previous revisions, which compiled new material and notes into appendices). The authors also examine new areas of interest, including the use of computers in the collection and evaluation of manuscript evidence and the effects that social and ideological influences had upon the work of scribes. The standard text for courses in biblical studies and the history of Christianity since its first publication in 1964, The Text of the New Testament is poised to become a definitive resource for a whole new generation of students."
Although delacoert refuses to admit it, I think she is a believer in the traditions of the "infallability" and "inerrancy" of the Bible, and anyone who doesn't agree is disparaging the Bible. Several hundred years of modern textual criticism of the Greek New Testament have demonstrated thousands of variants in the various manuscripts. Apparently, mentioning those facts is disparaging the Bible in delacoert's eyes.
I had a couple of Mormon missionaries stop by my house several years ago. They were pleasant and I enjoyed talking to them.
The one thing we disagreed on was the accuracy of the Bible. We all agreed that it was true as far as it was accurately translated. Where we disagreed was that I think most standard versions are very good translations while they do not.
I will say my Grandfather was a Southern Baptist preacher and a graduate of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louiville, KY. He graduated in the early 1900’s.
Granddady could read and translate both Greek and Latin. He once told me the King James version was a very good translation with no real inaccuracies. A few places where it could have been done better but not affecting the basic story.
Some of the newer ones such as Good News Bible are even better.
Didn't know their "reformed Egyptian".
It explains a lot.
Doh! There you go, disparaging the Bible! You heathen! :-)
John Smith just rewrote the Bible with a smattering of Masonic Bible/Masonic teachings. Anyone who is or has ever been a Mason will recognize the Masonic ideals and even vergabe in reading their Bible.
I bet GOP_Lady will still come in here and start campaigning for Romney. With all we now know about him she still would vote for that guy.
OBTW, my Protestant brothers and sisters neednt feel left out; the Mormon GAs refer to all of you as the lewd daughters of TGAAC.
Left out??? Your "Great and Abominable Church" didn't even rate a mention in Joseph's "first vision"....
And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, Never mind, all is wellI am well enough off. I then said to my mother, I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true. It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me?
Joseph Smith was a charlatan. You gotta wonder about people that think they need to have a lot of offspring to release ‘spirit babies.’
Well, as a drinking WOW violating member of TGAAC, I feel both left out and offended.
If there’s one thing that Joseph Merry Smithmas resented about the Vatican in Rome, it was its sheer size, temporal authority, and wealth.
Look, I’m just one ordinary Catholic mackerel-snapper who is grateful for my weekly opportunity to worship my Savior. Why does JS and the TOJCOLDS regard me as a target (the mishies have targeted me before)?
Or who produce such an obvious fraud as The Book of Abraham, an Egyptian funeral text smith spun into a yarn about Abraham.
The fruit of a rotten tree rule applies here.
And then Napoleon Bonaparte's troops found the Rosetta stone and a decade or two later European scholars were able to translate hieroglyphs without difficulty. At some point in the second half of the 1800s, real scholars actually translated those two or three "holy books" and they noted that Smith hadn't gotten a single word of any of it right, one of the items being a formula for brewing beer.
Are you saying the Book of Abraham is wrong? How dare you question Joseph Smith, “the man who could not lie”!
Why don’t you send flowers?
And the SECRET of the UNTRUTH went to the grave with Joseph; for NO MORMON can explain just what that UNTRUTH was!
Thanks for the ping!
You’re welcome AG.
Remarkable, just as the title of the thread indicates, mormons will quick attempt to denegrate the bible in order to protect its prophet and the bom. Do you even have a clue to what Metzger is talking about, or are you parroting the talking points put out by FAIR, et al without studying the transmission of the bible?
Here is how mormon history documents the way Smith translated the bom
We have what Smith claimed was the handwritten document from Abraham - how well was his translation of Egyptian? Take Smith's translation of Facimile 3 for example
Joseph's Interpretation of Facsimile 3
Fig. 1. Abraham sitting upon Pharaoh's throne, by the politeness of the king, with a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood, as emblematical of the grand Presidency in Heaven; with the scepter of justice and judgment in his hand.
Fig. 2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.
Fig. 3. Signifies Abraham in Egypt as given also in Figure 10 of Facsimile No. 1.
Fig. 4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.
Fig. 5. Shulem, one of the king's principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.
Fig. 6. Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince.
Abraham is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the king's court.
Egyptologist's Interpretation of Facsimile 3
Facsimile No. 3 is a depiction of a common funerary scene.
Egyptologist Klaus Baer provides this information about facsimile No. 3 in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1968, pp. 126-127:
Facsimile No. 3 shows a man (5) his hand raised in adoration and a cone of perfumed grease and a lotus flower on his head (ancient Egyptian festival attire), being introduced by Maat (4), the goddess of justice, and Anubis (6), the guide of the dead, into the presence of Osiris (1), enthroned as king of the Netherworld. Behind Osiris stands Isis (2), and in front of him is an offering-stand (3) with a jug and some flowers on it. Over the whole scene is a canopy with stars painted on it to represent the sky.
The scene comes from a mortuary papyrus and is similar to, but not identical with the scenes showing judgement of the deceased before Osiris such as P. JS III. It is a summary in one illustration of what the Breathing Permit promised: The deceased, after successfully undergoing judgement is welcomed into the presence of Osiris.
The texts, poorly copied as they are, carry us one step further. As far as it can be made out, the line of hieroglyphics below the scene reads.
'O Gods of ..., gods of Caverns, gods of the south, north, west, and east, grant well-being to Osiris Hor, justified, ...'
The characters above and to the left of the man are probably to be read: 'Osiris Hor, justified forever.' Even though Hor is a relatively common name in Greco-Roman Egypt, this does suggest 'Facsimile No. 3' reproduces part of the same manuscript that 'Facsimile No. 2' does. Hor's copy of the Breathing Permit would then have had two vignettes, one at the beginning and another ('Facsimile No. 3) at the end, an arrangement that is found in other copies of the same text."
Shall we also consider the Kinderhook plates translation or the Greek Psalter? No, you post shows that when the backs go against the wall, the mormons will attack the bible.
To determine something has been corrupted, you need to have the original to compare it with. How do the Mormons come to the conclusion that the Bible has been corrupted?
Hmmmmm.... one of us is on the wrong thread! This is the “What Mormons Think of the Bible” thread. :-)
Thanks! I had the impression that the papyri in question had been lost at some point after scholars first examined them but apparently not.
They flunked the New Testament.
Q Who does the Bible describe as "noble?"
A The Bereans (Acts 17:11)
Q How did the Bereans "measure the accuracy" of statements that would later come to be part of the NT (in the book of Acts)?
A According to Acts 17:11, they searched the Scriptures (the existing OT), to see if what the apostle Paul said was so.
Q How did Benson, Hinckley and Monson get it wrong in 1992?
A They turned the process of "measuring the accuracy" of a supposed revelation entirely on its head: They said to compare the old revelation against the new supposed "revelation."
Q What's problematic with that?
(1) There's no baseline standard.
(2) Jesus said many rogue messiahs would pop up in the end times. Just think of trying to "measure the accuracy" of the New Testament based upon something one or more of these rogue messiahs might claim as "revelational."
Noted: refusal to address the issue presented.
Start a thread on the topic, and I’d be happy to address your issue.
And we are supplying the WHY they think that way!
Speaking of the BIBLE; just WHAT did the PRESBYTERIANS of Jospeph day teach that was UNTRUE to what was in the BIBLE?
Certain men TOLD them so.
The SAME men that told them they would NEVER lead them astray.
"Trust me; I'm a
doctor Living Prophet®."
You are correct. It WAS lost for a while.
(My take is that is was saved by GOD to be revealed later how BOGUS MORMONism is.)
But those variants exist in the Alexandrian manuscripts as the differ from the Byzantine manuscripts that underly the KJV which Mormons ascribe to. Incidentally those Alexandrian manuscripts come from the same place as "Reformed Egyptian" --
Just like you tried to switch the discussion to another Christian denomination. LOL, duck and weave
That's probably why Mormons have as an article of faith:
"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly"
Is there anyone who believes differently?
I totally agree. God has left Mormons without excuse. When one of your sacred texts is shown to be completely false, how can you trust in any of the others? The Book of Abraham papyri completely shatters any credibility that Joseph Smith had to anyone who looks into the issue.
Is it any wonder that Joseph Smith could be later fooled by the Kinderhook Plates?
I had never thought about how the Rosetta Stone fit into the history of Joseph Smith's fraudulent translation of the funerary scrolls. I am glad you drew my attention to this bit of history.
I has to a particularly painful kind of denial to be confronted with straightforward evidence that your founding father is fraud. Standing publicly and saying I still believe that that which is proven to be a lie is true has a couple of benefits I suppose, but I think the main reason is that it is too difficult to face the alternative â that everything you have believed in is a lie.
The LSD church is a religious equivalent of something which is too big to die at this point. It needs to somehow be made into a more normal Christian church and get rid of the 1830’s vision of science fiction theology along with the fictitious books including the book of Mormon.
Translated by whom is the question. Mormonism requires you to put your faith in a man of extremely questionable character and morals. A man who has been found to have been fooled by the papyri and the kinderhook plates. If he was inspired of God, how does a man make so many errors in the bom? A man who has been shown time and time again to be in error.
If the bom is supposedly the most correct book on the face of the planet and js was doing God's work, why then did God allow him to be killed? Why wasn't he allowed to finish the work?
When confronted with these facts, how then, can one believe that the js version of the Bible is anywhere near accurate and or translated correctly?
The qualifier statement at the beginning of this post was used on me years ago, and I will admit, I was easy pickins for the missionaries because I didnt have a religious background. Now that my cynicism of the many things mormon have been shown to be correct, my problem is to get to know the Lord and put my faith in Him, not a man. Not only that, I must somehow show and prove to my wife that what shes believed for over 40 years is false.
Everything about the lds church, bom and js vers. of the Bible requires one to build their entire faith on the back of one man.
Regarding translating, Ill take a biblical scholar over js anyday. Regarding salvation, I'll take Jesus over js.
What Mormons Think of the Bible
They dont think much of it at all...
They try to replace it with Joey Smith’s fictious tale..
Joey Smith plagarized a story, embellished it with some Bible verses, and had it published in order to make some money..
Later, in order to make it more paletable, others claimed it was “restored” or added to the “testimony” of their mormon jesus...
There is no evidence that Joey Smith intended to replace the Bible when He first had the book of mormon published in 1830...
He was just going for a quick buck..
Now however, in order to sell Joey’s homemade religion, the mormons devalue the original Bible, and claim that Joey Smith the charlatan “restored” Christianity singlehanded after the Jesus of the Bible goofed, and thus saved the world..
Praise to the man who communed with Fanny Alger...