"Book of Mormon Christian?"

[mfbukowski]

“Fullness” here means doctrinal fullness. It means fullness of teachings. That teaching includes information about the ecclesiastical structure of the church, including priesthood and priestly offices.

It does suggest a structure. It may not be identical to the structure of present day LDS Church—and need not be so. The main thing is that it does suggest both priesthood and an ecclesiastical structure. That is what matters, as far as your argument is concerned.

Of course there were. The Book of Mormon recognizes the authority of the Twelve Apostles of Christ in the Western Hemisphere as having spiritual authority over the entire global church of Christ; and it also ordains Twelve Disciples who had jurisdiction exclusively over the church among the Nephites. Their ministry was perpetual. When one died, another was chosen to succeed him.

That is not true. How can you folks claim to be so knowledgeable about the Book of Mormon, and not know that? Here are some quotes:

Moroni 3:

1 The manner which the disciples, who were called the elders of the church, ordained priests and teachers

3 In the name of Jesus Christ I ordain you to be a priest, (or, if he be a teacher) I ordain you to be a teacher, to preach repentance and remission of sins through Jesus Christ, by the endurance of faith on his name to the end. Amen.

4 And after this manner did they ordain priests and teachers, according to the gifts and callings of God unto men; and they ordained them by the power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them.

Moroni 4:

1 The manner of their elders and priests administering the flesh and blood of Christ unto the church; and they administered it according to the commandments of Christ; wherefore we know the manner to be true; and the elder or priest did minister it

Moroni 6:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it.

The general principles they outline (teaching, preaching, and blessing the Sacrament) are the same. The details are not important.

Except that the Book of Mormon Church had priests. See above.

They had the Twelve Disciples, which were equavilent.
They had prophets who were called of God, and so does the LDS Church.

Glad to!

D&C 1:

30 And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually

D&C 5:

14 And to none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation, in this the beginning of the rising up and the coming forth of my church out of the wilderness—clear as the moon, and fair as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners.

D&C 10:

53 And for this cause have I said: If this generation harden not their hearts, I will establish my church among them.

D&C 18:

5 Wherefore, if you shall build up my church, upon the foundation of my gospel and my rock, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.

See also D&C 20:1-4.

The expression says, and means, everlasting, eternal.

Their “generation” continues on until today.

So how come Moroni talks about “priests” in the church after Christ?

The role of the high priests to offer scarifies ended, not the role of the high priests altogether.

zerinus

BOMC

These are some of the same arguments I was thinking of as well, and I am glad Zerinus posted them.

The issue of priesthood is a significant one. What priesthood did the Nephites have if not the Melchizadek priesthood? There were no Levites before or after Christ.

How could you say there was no priesthood after Christ, since one of the main places we find our sacrament prayers etc is in Moroni? Your theology seems to have not been thought out very well at all, and seems totally inconsistent.

 

[BOMC]

“Fullness” here means doctrinal fullness. It means fullness of teachings. That teaching includes information about the ecclesiastical structure of the church, including priesthood and priestly offices.

No, that is why there is the D&C. Joseph’s structure was not in TBOM.

It does suggest a structure. It may not be identical to the structure of present day LDS Church—and need not be so. The main thing is that it does suggest both priesthood and an ecclesiastical structure. That is what matters, as far as your argument is concerned.

When LDS tout their church structure as proof it is “the true church” then particulars matter. Without Joseph’s additions, no one following TBOM would arrive at a church structure like his.

Of course there were. The Book of Mormon recognizes the authority of the Twelve Apostles of Christ in the Western Hemisphere as having spiritual authority over the entire global church of Christ; and it also ordains Twelve Disciples who had jurisdiction exclusively over the church among the Nephites. Their ministry was perpetual. When one died, another was chosen to succeed him.

When Jesus called those twelve “disciples” in TBOM, he purposely did not refer to them as “apostles.”

Again, if a person emulated TBOM church structure, they would not have “twelve apostles” at its core. Semantics? Not hardly. The apostles bore witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something not required in TBOM since multitudes all saw him descend out of heaven and touched his body.

The “apostles” among Joseph’s churches are nowhere testifying that they saw Christ. It is an embarrassment before God.

Same can be said of their so called “prophets” who are called and confirmed by men. It would be impossible for a prophet to preach against itself. So what would they now call one sent to preach repentance against church leaders? There is no other title than that of a prophet, which Joseph hi-jacked and they have perpetuated.

That is not true. How can you folks claim to be so knowledgeable about the Book of Mormon, and not know that? Here are some quotes:

Moroni 3:

1 The manner which the disciples, who were called the elders of the church, ordained priests and teachers

3 In the name of Jesus Christ I ordain you to be a priest, (or, if he be a teacher) I ordain you to be a teacher, to preach repentance and remission of sins through Jesus Christ, by the endurance of faith on his name to the end. Amen.

4 And after this manner did they ordain priests and teachers, according to the gifts and callings of God unto men; and they ordained them by the power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them.

Moroni 4:

1 The manner of their elders and priests administering the flesh and blood of Christ unto the church; and they administered it according to the commandments of Christ; wherefore we know the manner to be true; and the elder or priest did minister it

Moroni 6:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it.

All you have done is cite references to “priests” which are different from “high priests.” You cannot show the existence of a high priest after Jesus, since he was the last one.

If you were to use TBOM as your guide to start a church, there would be no high priests.

The details are not important.

They are because you are using them as proof your church is “true.”

They had prophets who were called of God, and so does the LDS Church.

Please do not equate a personal visitation by God with a phone call from a GA. Until Joseph’s churches respect how prophets were called, they will lack the respect for how God worked.

Glad to!

D&C 1:

30 And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually

The date of this “revelation” is 1.5 years past the date Joseph started his church, therefore it cannot apply. The other verses you cited were not commandments for Joseph. In fact, several he retroactive added the word “church” to.

I would encourage you to reread D&C 10, which was given TWO YEARS before Joseph started a church.

Jesus told Joseph that his church was ALREADY there; defined WHO his church was; defined the requirements for SALVATION; and WARNED Joseph not to add anything to it:

67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church. (D&C 10)

The fact that Joseph did not retain the use of the Urim and Thummim is proof his job was done.

.

 

[BOMC]

BOMC

These are some of the same arguments I was thinking of as well, and I am glad Zerinus posted them.

The issue of priesthood is a significant one. What priesthood did the Nephites have if not the Melchizadek priesthood? There were no Levites before or after Christ.

How could you say there was no priesthood after Christ, since one of the main places we find our sacrament prayers etc is in Moroni? Your theology seems to have not been thought out very well at all, and seems totally inconsistent.

If you take the definition of the word “priesthood” by itself it is harmless - a collection of priests. Joseph/LDS go beyond that:

God gives priesthood authority to worthy male members of the Church so they can act in His name for the salvation of His children. (lds.org)

The problem is, you are not allowed to “act in Jesus’ name” unless you have their priesthood. That removes the purpose of his coming.

There is no qualifier to use the name of Jesus Christ!!! other than faith. See the offending difference?

This is the faith and authority Alma had when he started his church in the wilderness - no priesthood was necessary!

To “appoint” someone to give communion is fine and proper among a group of believers. But to say that group somehow has the monopoly of the power of Jesus, to perform ordinances, teach the gospel or form a group is preposterous.

 

[BartBurk]

Hey, BOMC, regarding this quote from the D&C:

67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church. (D&C 10)

Was that before the committee reworked the Book of Commandments and turned it into the D&C or after the committee was finished? It looks like they missed something they should have changed. It looks as if that was D&C 36:16 in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants:

irr.org/mit/boc/

 

[BOMC]

Hey, BOMC, regarding this quote from the D&C: Was that before the committee reworked the Book of Commandments and turned it into the D&C or after the committee was finished? It looks like they missed something they should have changed.

It was there all along. Shows how we all filter what we read.

Many have been reading TBOM their whole life yet never realize not a single Mormon Doctrine is in it. Sad I know - no offense.

 

[BartBurk]

It was there all along. Shows how we all filter what we read.

Many have been reading TBOM their whole life yet never realize not a single Mormon Doctrine is in it. Sad I know - no offense.

In defense of the LDS, all you have to do to be a member of the church is be baptized. The verse previous to what you have quoted discusses partaking of the waters of life so I am sure baptism is included in this case. The Book of Mormon does not seem to indicate that some special authority by ordination is necessary to baptize.

 

[zerinus]

No, that is why there is the D&C. Joseph’s structure was not in TBOM.

When LDS tout their church structure as proof it is “the true church” then particulars matter. Without Joseph’s additions, no one following TBOM would arrive at a church structure like his.

When Jesus called those twelve “disciples” in TBOM, he purposely did not refer to them as “apostles.”

Again, if a person emulated TBOM church structure, they would not have “twelve apostles” at its core. Semantics? Not hardly. The apostles bore witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something not required in TBOM since multitudes all saw him descend out of heaven and touched his body.

The “apostles” among Joseph’s churches are nowhere testifying that they saw Christ. It is an embarrassment before God.

Same can be said of their so called “prophets” who are called and confirmed by men. It would be impossible for a prophet to preach against itself. So what would they now call one sent to preach repentance against church leaders? There is no other title than that of a prophet, which Joseph hi-jacked and they have perpetuated.

All you have done is cite references to “priests” which are different from “high priests.” You cannot show the existence of a high priest after Jesus, since he was the last one.

If you were to use TBOM as your guide to start a church, there would be no high priests.

They are because you are using them as proof your church is “true.”

Please do not equate a personal visitation by God with a phone call from a GA. Until Joseph’s churches respect how prophets were called, they will lack the respect for how God worked.

The date of this “revelation” is 1.5 years past the date Joseph started his church, therefore it cannot apply. The other verses you cited were not commandments for Joseph. In fact, several he retroactive added the word “church” to.

I would encourage you to reread D&C 10, which was given TWO YEARS before Joseph started a church.

Jesus told Joseph that his church was ALREADY there; defined WHO his church was; defined the requirements for SALVATION; and WARNED Joseph not to add anything to it:

The fact that Joseph did not retain the use of the Urim and Thummim is proof his job was done.

I can see that this discussion could be stretched a long time; and would end up being a big waste of time. So I am not going to continue it any further than this. I will only say in closing that I have nothing against what you are trying to do. If you genuinely believe that you can persuade people to believe in the Book of Mormon without at the same time believing in the LDS Church, good luck to you! Go for it! I am all in favor of that idea. From my point of view, the more people believe in the Book of Mormon, the better, regardless of whether they decide to join the LDS Church or not. I am sceptical that you will be able to pull it off; but one never knows. You might be able to surprise me! I would love to be surprised in that one!

zerinus

 

[BrianH]

Same question Sola Scriptura Protestants are asked BOMC. I tried to look on website and had no luck.
Is there a verse in TBOM that states that all you should use is TBOM?

 

[BOMC]

In defense of the LDS, all you have to do to be a member of the church is be baptized. The verse previous to what you have quoted discusses partaking of the waters of life so I am sure baptism is included in this case. The Book of Mormon does not seem to indicate that some special authority by ordination is necessary to baptize.

Thanks for the note regarding verse 66:

Yea, if they will come, they may, and partake of the waters of life freely. (D&C 10:66)

Notice the word “freely” compared to going through a High Priest in times past. Wow!

Actually, D&C 10 contains even more insights:

And this I do that I may establish my gospel that there may not be so much contention; yea, Satan doth stir up the hearts of the people to contention concerning the points of my doctrine; and in these things they do err, for they do wrest the scriptures and do not understand them. (D&C 10:63)

What a blessing to have another book of scripture that paralled the Bible! By comparing them both, all disputations are off.

Add to that the word of the Lord in D&C 10, and “the church” and “gospel” are forever locked as simple.

---

The power to baptize is inherent in the name of Jesus Christ, like casting out demons, healing the sick, and raising the dead:

And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (Mark 16:17)

Moroni said if the day ever came that those things stopped among men, it would be due to a lack of faith, not priesthood:

33 And Christ hath said: If ye will have faith in me ye shall have power to do whatsoever thing is expedient in me.
34 And he hath said: Repent all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me, and be baptized in my name, and have faith in me, that ye may be saved.
35 And now, my beloved brethren, if this be the case that these things are true which I have spoken unto you, and God will show unto you, with power and great glory at the last day, that they are true, and if they are true has the day of miracles ceased?
36 Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
37 Behold I say unto you, Nay; for **it is by faith **that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men; wherefore, if these things have ceased wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief, and all is vain.
38 For no man can be saved, according to the words of Christ, save they shall have faith in his name; wherefore, if these things have ceased, then has faith ceased also; and awful is the state of man, for they are as though there had been no redemption made. (Moroni 7)

The tragedy among the followers of Joseph or any priesthood believing group is, it has replaced where our faith is meant to be today. This is no longer Old Testament style, it is Jesus’ style.

Add to that the many Christians experiencing miracles today - without “priesthood authority.” We have true servants of Christ who witness that they have seen him; that they have been to the Holy City and seen the Father - all without Joseph’s ideology.

Check out Richard Sigmund’s “A Place Called Heaven” or Jesse Duplantis’ “Close Encounters of the God King” for a start. Later, monitor who Sid Roth interviews, there are so many walking with Christ - with no “priesthood.” On the other hand, those claiming special authority hardly ever manifest the power of God.

Joseph did experience God, and many of his early followers had faith in Christ and moved mountains. But after the next generation came along with a faith in all things Joseph, the power gradually diminished until now it is almost gone.

.

 

[BOMC]

I can see that this discussion could be stretched a long time; and would end up being a big waste of time.

It is only a waste if you don’t see. I ask that you respect TBOM or stop using it.

All the best.

.

 

[zerinus]

It is only a waste if you don’t see. I ask that you respect TBOM or stop using it.

All the best.

I suggest that you repent and return to the LDS Church!

zerinus

 

[BOMC]

Same question Sola Scriptura Protestants are asked BOMC. I tried to look on website and had no luck.
Is there a verse in TBOM that states that all you should use is TBOM?

Please qualify the framework. I will assume you are referring to the Protestant framework. The answer is no. TBOM says its purpose is to support the Bible, therefore one must accept the Bible if they accept TBOM.

If you are standing in Joseph’s framework, I would say yes. Do not go beyond the Bible and BoM when it comes to the requirements of salvation. (D&C 10:68)

God always speaks, but He will not add one iota to what is required to gain access into His presence. Joseph violated that law by adding D&C 132 or eternal/plural marriage to the Christian Salvation/Mormon Exaltation.

Hope that explains it.

.

 

[BOMC]

I suggest that you repent and return to the LDS Church!

This isn’t a game. I am quite ready to stand before God with The Book of Mormon in my hand, and Moroni by my side.

 

[BrianH]

Please qualify the framework. I will assume you are referring to the Protestant framework. The answer is no. TBOM says its purpose is to support the Bible, therefore one must accept the Bible if they accept TBOM.

If you are standing in Joseph’s framework, I would say yes. Do not go beyond the Bible and BoM when it comes to the requirements of salvation. (D&C 10:68)

God always speaks, but He will not add one iota to what is required to gain access into His presence. Joseph violated that law by adding D&C 132 or eternal/plural marriage to the Christian Salvation/Mormon Exaltation.

Hope that explains it.

.

Ok two questions then
You guys accept the D & C? You probably already answered it but its good practice for you
Ok and, thinking here, do you accept the Bible because ? In other words, Catholics say they accept it because the Church gave it to them. When you are a Protestant, the answer may be the same, or it may not be. So for you the answer is?
Thanks again. Sorry to ask so many questions, I have been on the net for…a long time, well since Gore invented it and you are the first…one of you I have met

 

[zerinus]

This isn’t a game. I am quite ready to stand before God with The Book of Mormon in my hand, and Moroni by my side.

And be condemned for rejecting God’s only true Church!

zerinus

 

[BOMC]

Ok two questions then
You guys accept the D & C? You probably already answered it but its good practice for you

No we don’t. We only respect two or three revelations that pertain to The Book of Mormon. (TBOM)

Ok and, thinking here, do you accept the Bible because ? In other words, Catholics say they accept it because the Church gave it to them. When you are a Protestant, the answer may be the same, or it may not be. So for you the answer is?

We accept it because TBOM says we are to accept it. It does however warn that things would be removed, like instructions for baptism and communion.

Thanks again. Sorry to ask so many questions, I have been on the net for…a long time, well since Gore invented it and you are the first…one of you I have met

No prob.

 

[BOMC]

And be condemned for rejecting God’s only true Church!

This is what it says:

For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord’s; and the others shall say: I, I am the Lord’s; and thus shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the Lord—(2 Nephi 28:3)

Get out while you can. Do not associate with any church that is so arrogant as to claim theirs is the one.

 

[BrianH]

Here is my thoughts BOMC. And while you did not ask, the site is up and thus open to comment.

One of the oddest things is the complete lack of real information about the people running it. If for example, the person running it is John Miller. Say so. This would not be a problem but the School of Ministry wants 395 bucks. Now does the Book of Mormon say that in order to be a minister you need to pay some anonymous person 395 bucks
tbom.org/faq.htm
The site as all the tell tale signs of a mill. Not that it promises a degree mind you but no information, they have the obvious clip art pictures. It even shows which ones “study” and “students”.
If you want to promote your beliefs, promote them. But the 395 bucks for ?, the lack of any real names or people (even the registration shows that they used Admin Name:TB OM
and a PO Box.
It bothers me. Some person or persons out in California is all we know about them
In my opinion

 

[BOMC]

It’s not about any person. If a person’s name were there, then that would be what they’d talk about.

Regarding the course for TBOM ministry, it is there for those who are led to it, nothing else.

Now, instead of wasting our time, have you received a witness of The Book of Mormon? If not, will you take the challenge to read it and ask God if it is true?

 

[RebeccaJ]

The proper use of the BoM?

JS used it as a con. Seems it is being used for that again, or still.

Grifting for Jesus.