BIG QUESTION for MORMONS....:)

  • Thread starter Thread starter justinthemartyr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

justinthemartyr

Guest
The Old testament is more perfectly fulfilled in the New Testament. It is called typology. We see this blatently in places where it says that Christ is the new adam, in that through one man(adam) sin came into the world, and through one man (Jesus)…
We also see it throughout with more subtle but real typologies.
Mary is the new eve, Mary is also the NT type of the ark of the Old Covenant, in that the old ark contained three “types” of Christ, the Ten commandments(Word of God, the manna from heaven(bread from heaven) and the rod of aaron which sprouted(vine)
mary held the actual Word made flesh, the actual bread from Heaven of which you will eat of and not die and the True Vine, whom if you are In, you have eternal life, but can be cut off).

So, getting to my point. With the enormous amounts of typological fulfillments from the OT to the NT that God made sure were in there so we would know that Scripture was true and that Christ was true, where is the typological fulfillment from the NT scriptures, to the book of Mormon?

if the book of mormon is truly scripture, then there would be typology, more perfectly fulfilled from the NT to the NEWER testament of Jesus Christ, as claimed by the mormon church.

I look forward to Mormon replies to this question.

thank you. justin
 
Yes, the fact that typology is strewn throughout the Old and New Testament, and that it does not exist in the Book of Mormon, is evidence in and of itself that the book of mormon has no Divine inspiration.
 
justinthemartyr said:
The Old testament is more perfectly fulfilled in the New Testament. It is called typology. We see this blatently in places where it says that Christ is the new adam, in that through one man(adam) sin came into the world, and through one man (Jesus)…
We also see it throughout with more subtle but real typologies.
Mary is the new eve, Mary is also the NT type of the ark of the Old Covenant, in that the old ark contained three “types” of Christ, the Ten commandments(Word of God, the manna from heaven(bread from heaven) and the rod of aaron which sprouted(vine)
mary held the actual Word made flesh, the actual bread from Heaven of which you will eat of and not die and the True Vine, whom if you are In, you have eternal life, but can be cut off).

So, getting to my point. With the enormous amounts of typological fulfillments from the OT to the NT that God made sure were in there so we would know that Scripture was true and that Christ was true, where is the typological fulfillment from the NT scriptures, to the book of Mormon?

if the book of mormon is truly scripture, then there would be typology, more perfectly fulfilled from the NT to the NEWER testament of Jesus Christ, as claimed by the mormon church.

I look forward to Mormon replies to this question.

thank you. justin
Click to expand...
I once already answered that question for you here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3408125#post3408125

Can’t you read or what?

zerinus
 
justinthemartyr said:
So, getting to my point. With the enormous amounts of typological fulfillments from the OT to the NT that God made sure were in there so we would know that Scripture was true and that Christ was true, where is the typological fulfillment from the NT scriptures, to the book of Mormon?

if the book of mormon is truly scripture, then there would be typology, more perfectly fulfilled from the NT to the NEWER testament of Jesus Christ, as claimed by the mormon church.

I look forward to Mormon replies to this question.

thank you. justin
Click to expand...
You have obviously never read the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ (complete with types and symbols) from its first page to the last verse. The Book of Mormon is not a “newer” testament, it’s another testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon together with the Old and New Testaments form a unified, complementary testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ. If you’re looking for prophecies about the Book of Mormon, the Bible contains several. Here are just two. One from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament;

Ezekiel 37:
16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Revelation 14:
6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
 
BCPoulsen said:
You have obviously never read the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ (complete with types and symbols) from its first page to the last verse. The Book of Mormon is not a “newer” testament, it’s another testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon together with the Old and New Testaments form a unified, complementary testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ. If you’re looking for prophecies about the Book of Mormon, the Bible contains several. Here are just two. One from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament;

Ezekiel 37:
16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Revelation 14:
6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Click to expand...
the mormons claim this to mean “scrolls” the term “stick” yet the term “stick” is actually the greek term “et”

the term scrolls is explicitly used in the Old Testament, and therefore we know that this term “stick” is not being used as a description for “scroll”.

therefore it is false in it’s interpretation.

This is in no way a typological fulfillment from Ot to the book of mormon.

by the way, the mormon definition of the “everlasting gospel” is evidently missing the very important mormon doctrine of baptism for the dead, something the mormon leaders forgot to preach about for many years. The book of mormon, claimed to be the fullness of the everlasting gospel says nothing about a baptism for the dead, therefore it cannot be the everlasting gospel. Just one reason.
 
justinthemartyr said:
copying the NT and pretexting it does not count as typological fulfillment of the Old testament. nice try though. give me one example of a new typological fulfillment that does not already occur in the Nt.
Click to expand...
It does not have to be “new”. Two people testifying to the same event will be telling the same story, only they may be seeing it from a different perspective. The Book of Mormon “another testament of Jesus Christ”. That means that it will be testifying to the same mediating role of Jesus Christ, using the same typology as the Bible. It will not be telling a different story from the Bible. But the historical background in which the events take place will be different. That is where the difference will be found, not in the typology of the Atonement.

zerinus
 
Name any book in Borders Bookstore and I can probably find passages that point to Jesus fullfilling prophecies.
 
BCPoulsen said:
If you’re looking for prophecies about the Book of Mormon, the Bible contains several. Here are just two. One from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament;

Ezekiel 37:
16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
Click to expand...
BC, read the whole chapter.

Ezekiel 37 has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon. The entire chapter (including the dry bones part at the beginning), read in context, is an extended prophecy about the reunification of the then-divided Kingdom of Israel under one king (Ez 37:22). The two sticks represent the Northern and Southern Kingdoms (Ephraim and Judah, respectively). It says that right in the passage. No other interpretation is necessary.

The passage says that the sticks are for “Judah” and “Ephraim”. Note the same “nicknames” for the two divisions of Israel (Judah, Ephraim) in Hosea 5:3-14 and 6:4. The bible is remarkably consistent.

Besides, the BoM claims that the Nephites were descended from Manasseh, not Ephraim. So the Mormon misinterpretation doesn’t logically hold together anyway.

The Mormons are horribly deceptive in the way they pull a few verses out of context and twist the meaning. Their leaders know better and should be ashamed.

Paul
 
this use of Ez 37 must be standard morman prooftextnig,

recently I corresponded with a local morman via email asking him for some OT evidence and this was the only thinkg he provided to me which left me thinking that their bible studying is very similar to some prtotestants who take things badly out of context and distrub the meanings.
 
zerinus said:
And that proves that the Book of Mormon is false? How?

zerinus
Click to expand...
It doesn’t prove that anything is false. I only meant to say that agruing that one can see the fullfillment of prophecies in a certain text does not prove or disprove the validity of the text, IMO
 
J_C said:
this use of Ez 37 must be standard morman prooftextnig,

recently I corresponded with a local morman via email asking him for some OT evidence and this was the only thinkg he provided to me which left me thinking that their bible studying is very similar to some prtotestants who take things badly out of context and distrub the meanings.
Click to expand...
Yes, Mormons generally only learn proof texts - a few verses wrenched out of context - and do not analyze entire passages. They play a game called “scripture chase” in which the moderator will call out “two sticks!” and the first one to open their bible to the right verse gets a point. Mormon missionaries use these proof texts to bamboozle those who know nothing about the bible (99.9% of the human race). But if you ask them to step into the context and discuss the entire passage, their whole presentation falls apart.

Paul
 
Valke2 said:
It doesn’t prove that anything is false. I only meant to say that agruing that one can see the fullfillment of prophecies in a certain text does not prove or disprove the validity of the text, IMO
Click to expand...
I was not trying to prove or disprove the validity of the text. I was merely responding to, or rather exposing the illogicality of his objections.

zerinus
 
zerinus said:
It does not have to be “new”. Two people testifying to the same event will be telling the same story, only they may be seeing it from a different perspective. The Book of Mormon “another testament of Jesus Christ”. That means that it will be testifying to the same mediating role of Jesus Christ, using the same typology as the Bible. It will not be telling a different story from the Bible. But the historical background in which the events take place will be different. That is where the difference will be found, not in the typology of the Atonement.

zerinus
Click to expand...
Okay, so if I were to write a book in some old english lingo and copy the events of the NT in parts, and then add my own invented material that sounds similar to the content of scripture, I could call it scripture and say it is typological from the old testament?

uh…I don’t think that would be typology. The new Testament was already written, it did not need to be added to or amended.

I see nothing in my reading of the book of mormon which persuades me that it is in any way typological. it would have to be typological to the New testament, in that it came about almost 1800 years after Christ ascended into heaven.
 
BCPoulsen said:
You have obviously never read the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ (complete with types and symbols) from its first page to the last verse. The Book of Mormon is not a “newer” testament, it’s another testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon together with the Old and New Testaments form a unified, complementary testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ. If you’re looking for prophecies about the Book of Mormon, the Bible contains several. Here are just two. One from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament;

Ezekiel 37:
16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Revelation 14:
6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Click to expand...
Reply In Ezekiel 37 All Honest Bible scholars interpret the Hebrew word translated “stick” to means a piece of wood, not a scroll. The Lord also told Ezekial precisely what to write on the two sticks, and it was not the “Bible” and the “B. of M.” He was told to write the words “for Judah” on one stick and “for Joseph” on the other. The Bible speaks of books and scrolls in many verses, such as: Is. 8:1; 34:4; Jer. 36:2; Ezek. 2:9; 3:1-3; Rev. 6:14. It also speaks of sticks in Num. 17:1-8; 15:32; I Kings 17:12. But God never interchanges these words. The people asked in Ezek. 37:18, “Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these?” That question is answered in the next few verses, when the Lord declared the two Kingdoms of Israel would be brought together as one nation with one King again. In fact, the entire chapter is a prophecy of the restoration of Israel to her own land after captivity. For LDS to claim a couple of verses are about the B. of M. in the middle of that message would be out of place. Furthermore, it was Ezekial who wrote on both sticks. Did Ezekial write both the Bible and the B. of M.? If not, the Mormon interpretation does not fit this text. Also I Nephi 5:14 and II Nephi 3:4 says Lehi was a descendant of Manasseh not Ephraim (i know details, details) Joseph Smith blows Mormon defenders claims Ezekiel is speaking about the BOM because Ezekiel speaks of the stick of Ephraim The book of Mormon is supposedly the history of the descendants of Manasseh. OOOOOPS!

Tiber Diving Class of 2004 (we go deeper!)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top