What are the best evidences to support the authenticity of the Book of Mormon? (OPEN)

Prove it. Since the earliest of your coreligionists would seem to have originated their ideas on Scripture no earlier than the 1500s, where did they derive their authority with regard to the canon of Scripture, particularly the NT canon? After all, at their onset, they had a canon already in place to fiddle around with. What was their authority for so doing? And how did they discern that authority, some 1450 years after the last portion of the NT was written, and well over 1100 years after Church authority had already determined the canon, under the Holy Spirit's guidance?

And if the issue were still an open question to be decided, what does that say about the care, guidance and nurturing Jesus promised to give His Church in Matthew 28? It would be more probably correct to suppose, if His Church had lapsed into such egregious errors as you seem to allege almost from the get-go, that the whole idea of Christianity is a fraud, than to suppose that a purportedly almighty, omniscient and omnipresent God could suffer His children to labor in darkness for 1500 years until the canon could be made “right.”

Indeed, the Mormons themselves make much of such a supposed early apostasy of the Church, and use that very supposition to lay a claim to legitimacy for their highly irregular beliefs. You are closed to a Mormon mentality than you apparently know.

You forgot that the prayer starts with ...

Hail Mary? Are you that blind?

Hopefully if you educated yourself and looked beyond your own bias you may learn the truth one day.

I say the same in return, but wish you would believe the Scriptures not your church's interpretational dogma. I know it is hard to learn what those priests have indoctrinated you to believe. Believe your eyes, and the Holy Spirit, not me.

I will add Paul's words. It's kinda funny that he berates the Roman church for it's desire to be under the Law.. and not the Spirit. Things haven't changed much, have they?

Romans 5 1Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a]have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we[b] rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. 3Not only so, but we[c] also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.

6You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. 8But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! 10For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Prove it.

Prove your own faith. I need not justify it to you. My first recognized co-religionist is Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus, a Jew. Your attempt to discredit the Holy Spirit is duly noted, along with your desire to elevate an earthly organization.

You can believe what you wish. I trust in the God of Abraham. I have faith in the shed Blood of Jesus. It shields me from the poisonous insults of His enemies, and promises me etenal life with Him.

Your mileage may vary. I have no problem with Christians who worship in your Roman Church. I just want them to do it with their eyes wide open... and know they are accepting of idols and all!

Potato, potahto, whatever... and idol is a graven image!

John 3: 5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You[c] must be born again.' 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

9"How can this be?" Nicodemus asked.

10"You are Israel's teacher," said Jesus, "and do you not understand these things? 11I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God." - NIV

.. with love, Jesus

Mary was an anointed young girl who found favor with God, and gave birth to our Savior. She went on to have other children with her husband, Joseph, thus making her a HUMAN BEING and not divine. I’m not sure how Catholics come up with the idea that she is part of the Godhead / Trinity, but she was not and is not. She was a human being who gave birth to our Lord — thus making Him able to be fully God and fully man simultaneously.

The Book of Mormon is a book written by a man who believed he was a Prophet, when in fact, he was not. God’s Word was given complete and in tact, with warnings (end of Revelation) against adding to, or taking away, from anything written before or after. Despite its history passed down through the ages, its authenticity and integrity remains faithful and stable. Praise God for a Creator who speaks clearly so we can understand Him, and so we can walk with Him and worship Him alone.

... Indeed, the Mormons themselves make much of such a supposed early apostasy of the Church, ...

So your argument to me is about what Mormons do? Lame is a kind word for that attempt! Study your own church history, and find your own truth.

It seems you have been well indoctrinated. In Ireland, I guess you could start shooting at me, since I refuse to bow to Rome.

Judaism has a longer history than your group. Guess who wins in the end? If anybody has a claim to being God's chosen, they are the ones. I am a Jew, in God's eyes.

john 6: 28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"

29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

30So they asked him, "What miraculous sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'"

32Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."

34"Sir," they said, "from now on give us this bread."

35Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." -NIV

... with love, Jesus!

Nice boilerplate dodge, but you clearly avoided my questions. Linking yourself directly with the thought of St. Paul is fine, but your entire cant demonstrates that a 1500 year-wide gap apparently exists between St. Paul and the time when people "finally" began to think like him again. A lot took place during that interval, including the finishing of the canonical writings and their inclusion in a canon of Scripture. These were decided issues long before people in the 1500s had the temerity to tinker with that canon anew. That is the sort of thing which I was trying to get answers for from you. But...I think you already knew that.

Let's try again, shall we? You say there are no missing books from your Bible. I say that 7 full books and parts of two others are missing. My version preceded yours. This is a historical fact. How did people arrive on-scene in the 1500s with the authority to change what was already settled? How did they know they had that authority? Why does this 1500 year chasm of apparent darkness, as you clearly allege, not lead to seeming ineptitude on the part of Jesus Christ Himself, when He promised to be with and guide His Church all days till the end in Matthew 28, and clearly "failed" in the delivery on that promise?

Matthew 6: 19”Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
22”The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. 23But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

24”No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

I’m not sure how Catholics come up with the idea that she is part of the Godhead / Trinity, but she was not and is not

I, in turn, have no idea how people like you can allege, with an apparent, sincerely-held belief, that we Catholics believe such nonsense. You have been on this forum for nearly 2 years. If you had been paying even the slightest bit of attention, you would certainly know that your assertion, quoted above, is utterly false and slanderous. There are enough genuine differences of belief between us that you don't need to make-up others or perpetuate the clearly erroneous accusations of other ignorant people.

As for Mary's having other children or not, I would simply point out, at this late hour, that the issue is not nearly as cut-and-dried as you smugly suppose. There is room for honest people to have honestly varying opinions here, but I suspect that, just as you are so ignorant of Church teaching that you suppose we Catholics "worship" Mary as part of the "Godhead," it is equally likely that you haven't ever even bothered to barely look into Catholicism's reasons for asserting Mary's perpetual virginity, too. As you speak from ignorance on her status quite outside of the Godhead, you speak from ignorance while denying her virginity after Christ's birth. You do her and her Son insult, on at least two levels.

You suppose that the context of these admonitions applies outside of individuals, and that, I would guess, is the point to the picture you posted of the interior of St. Peter's. Yet you might look at the various commands in the Old Testament that the Israelites give the best materials, craftsmanship and treasure in the building and furnishing of the Temple. We Catholics seek to do no less, as the entire point is to give glory to God. Does not God Himself far outdo any of our best attempts in His adornment of Heaven? Does not all of that give Him glory? Why, then, do you object at our poor attempts to bring but a scintilla of a clue to that glory here on earth?

...which had some potential to be civil and interesting.

So, I haven't been civil? You allege all sorts of facts and attribute them to me, then want me to defend them. Hmmmmm... that is interesting.

You may pontificate all you wish, but it will not change the role of the Holy Spirit! You may call me all sorts of names, and make all sort of allegations of ignorance, but it won't erase my Christianity. Jesus assures us of eternal life, not the Catholic hierarchy.

I am not ignorant of the Roman Catholic Church and it's liturgy, history, and false claims of exclusivity. Nor, have I said anything not backed up by Scripture. My "hijack" was a simple connection of two churches, who claimthat exclusivity!

I then posted a simple response to a rejection of my thesis. I never posted anything to you, nor invited you into the discussion. You interjected your suppositions, and spurious claims and tried to make them mine, in response to another poster. Why should I respond to that drivel?

I can only assume you must feel yourself called to be an "answer guy", called to beat down the stupid Protestant. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't play with children or fools, and I am anything but stupid! Good night.

BTW, both of your organizations have some mighty nice real estate. I guess the poor are no more...

Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple. Your church is the money "collector". His temple isn't made of stone, but since you don't accept the Scriptures, unless deciphered by your priests and earthly kings, you wouldn't understand. Your faith is apparently bound to earthly things.

Jesus admonition is in the New Testament, FRiend. He tells us that WE are His temple... not a gilded stone building!

John 5: 33They said to him, "John's disciples often fast and pray, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours go on eating and drinking."

34Jesus answered, "Can you make the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? 35But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; in those days they will fast."

36He told them this parable: "No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old. 37And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. 38No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. 39And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, 'The old is better.' "

My friend, you yourself gave me the invitation to join the discussion when you delivered a gratuitous and rather irrelevant attack, with an innuendo-laden picture, on my Church. You asserted erroneous ideas regarding the canon of Scripture, and I asked you to back those assertions up. I noted your great authority on the matter by pointing-out that you know so little about the canon differences and their history that you bought-into, and continued, another poster's erroneous observation that only “four” books are omitted in your Bibles, when in fact there are more than that. You have not answered my quite relevant questions on the canon issues, and I see you have no intention of doing so.

You are abysmally ignorant of Catholic teaching, as well as its history and liturgy. Until you provide evidence to the contrary with coherent, fact-based argumentation, I have no choice but to believe I am correct in my observation of you ignorance of all things Catholic.

Answer my questions about the canon of Scripture, or don't. It matters not a whit to me personally. But, for the umpteenth time, when you assert that your Bible is not missing any books, and I challenge you to cite your bona-fides for making that assertion in the face of simple history (never mind the working of the Holy Spirit!), it is glaringly apparent that you have no real understanding of the issues upon which to mount a defense of your original assertion that your Bible is complete.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.