Fun question for my LDS friends.

[Jessup]

Happy new years everyone.
I have a funny question for my christian brothers and sisters at the LDS, church. I ask my close friends this all the time that are LDS. If the LDS church is the reformed church of Jesus Christ. Why the hect didn’t anyone put the 7 books from the original new testament back into the gospel, That Martin Luther through away? when everything was restored. I ask this in the most fun loving respectful manner.
Cheers! :thumbsup:

 

[flyonthewall]

Interesting question. I tried looking up what you are referring to, but don’t know if I found what it was.
According to what I have found:
"OTHER than the Apocryphal books that the Catholic Bible still contains, according to his writings and commentary, Martin Luther wanted at least FOUR other books of the Bible removed because he believed they were not canon.

The public outcry over removing these books, however, was so great that Martin Luther relented and left them in, thus they are a part of every translation from the King James forward.

Luther wanted to remove the Epistle of James, Esther, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation.

As for Protestantism, the Anglicans and Calvinists always kept the entire New Testament But for over a century the followers of Luther excluded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse, and even went further than their master by rejecting the three remaining deuterocanonicals, II Peter, II and III John."

Is this what you are talking about?

 

[pablope]

Happy new years everyone.
I have a funny question for my christian brothers and sisters at the LDS, church. I ask my close friends this all the time that are LDS. If the LDS church is the reformed church of Jesus Christ. Why the hect didn’t anyone put the 7 books from the original new testament back into the gospel, That Martin Luther through away? when everything was restored. I ask this in the most fun loving respectful manner.

 Cheers! :thumbsup:

Are you talking about the 7 OT books removed by the Protestants?

 

[Javl]

I’m sure that he meant the 7 books that are not in the Protestant Bible.

I also have a question for my LDS friends that has never been answered by any of them:

If the Bible is not correctly translated throughout, according to the LDS, how come God did not give Joseph Smith the “correct” translation but did give him the Book of Mormon?

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Prague]

I have wonder that too…

 

[zerinus]

I also have a question for my LDS friends that has never been answered by any of them:

If the Bible is not correctly translated throughout, according to the LDS, how come God did not give Joseph Smith the “correct” translation but did give him the Book of Mormon?

Firstly, the issue with the Bible is not just a matter of translation; we believe that important material has gone missing from it.

Secondly, much of that missing material has been restored in various ways—while others remain to be restored. One purpose of the Book of Mormon, for example, is to correct some of the doctrinal errors that have occurred as a result of those omissions. The Doctrine and Covenants restores or corrects even more of those errors, which has caused “contention” in the Christian world. The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, which is found as footnotes in the LDS edition of the KJV, as well as in the appendix, restores even more of those missing pieces of the puzzle. The Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price, as well as JS-Matthew, are extracts of that translation, which restores many of those missing jigsaw pieces. And of course, there is much more that the Lord has promised that will be revealed in due course, such as the Brass Plates of Laban, or the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon, as well as many other books of scripture that are promised and remain to be restored.

 

[Jessup]

Interesting question. I tried looking up what you are referring to, but don’t know if I found what it was.
According to what I have found:
"OTHER than the Apocryphal books that the Catholic Bible still contains, according to his writings and commentary, Martin Luther wanted at least FOUR other books of the Bible removed because he believed they were not canon.

The public outcry over removing these books, however, was so great that Martin Luther relented and left them in, thus they are a part of every translation from the King James forward.

Luther wanted to remove the Epistle of James, Esther, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation.

As for Protestantism, the Anglicans and Calvinists always kept the entire New Testament But for over a century the followers of Luther excluded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse, and even went further than their master by rejecting the three remaining deuterocanonicals, II Peter, II and III John."

Is this what you are talking about?

Yes I am referring to which ever books where taken out, of the bible. During the protestant reformation. I can’t remember which ones or how many, but I thought it was 7 books that where taken out.
Cheers!

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

THe Mormons do not use the old testament that Jesus used???

 

[NEWCATHOLICJEFF]

THe Mormons do not use the old testament that Jesus used???

No they are following Martin Luther.

 

[Javl]

Firstly, the issue with the Bible is not just a matter of translation; we believe that important material has gone missing from it.

Secondly, much of that missing material has been restored in various ways—while others remain to be restored. One purpose of the Book of Mormon, for example, is to correct some of the doctrinal errors that have occurred as a result of those omissions. The Doctrine and Covenants restores or corrects even more of those errors, which has caused “contention” in the Christian world. The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, which is found as footnotes in the LDS edition of the KJV, as well as in the appendix, restores even more of those missing pieces of the puzzle. The Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price, as well as JS-Matthew, are extracts of that translation, which restores many of those missing jigsaw pieces. And of course, there is much more that the Lord has promised that will be revealed in due course, such as the Brass Plates of Laban, or the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon, as well as many other books of scripture that are promised and remain to be restored.

Thank you for your answer, Zerinus. You explanation brings up other questions:

1 ) what parts of the Bible were corrupted?
2 ) how do we know that they were/are corrupt?
3 ) how do we know that the “restored” parts of the Bible are correct?
4 ) If the Christian Bible in use today is still corrupt why does the LDS still use it as is?

The Bible in use in the Christian world today is basically the same that was given it by the Catholic Church in the 4th century A.D. The truths presented are the same as those given by Jesus and the Apostles. Semantics may change over time but the message remains the same, which is the important part. The same thing is taught today that was taught over 2000 years ago, from the time of the Apostles and Paul through the early Church Fathers to the Theologians and Biblical scholars of today. The “contention” that has resulted of course is that produced by the LDS “theology” and the LDS insistance of errors and apostacy. All of which has been proven false time and again and yet the LDS can provide no proof otherwise.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[zerinus]

Thank you for your answer, Zerinus. You explanation brings up other questions:

1 ) what parts of the Bible were corrupted?
2 ) how do we know that they were/are corrupt?
3 ) how do we know that the “restored” parts of the Bible are correct?
4 ) If the Christian Bible in use today is still corrupt why does the LDS still use it as is?

The Bible in use in the Christian world today is basically the same that was given it by the Catholic Church in the 4th century A.D. The truths presented are the same as those given by Jesus and the Apostles. Semantics may change over time but the message remains the same, which is the important part. The same thing is taught today that was taught over 2000 years ago, from the time of the Apostles and Paul through the early Church Fathers to the Theologians and Biblical scholars of today. The “contention” that has resulted of course is that produced by the LDS “theology” and the LDS insistance of errors and apostacy. All of which has been proven false time and again and yet the LDS can provide no proof otherwise.

Your last paragraph shows that you are not really interested in the answer to the questions you have asked, therefore I will not waste my time in trying to answer them.

 

[Jerusha]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax in Veritate
THe Mormons do not use the old testament that Jesus used???

Response by NewCatholicJeff:

No they are following Martin Luther.

If more Mormons read Maccabees, there would be fewer Mormons. Go ahead, compare the two, rich in similarities with Alma.

 

[flyonthewall]

Yes I am referring to which ever books where taken out, of the bible. During the protestant reformation. I can’t remember which ones or how many, but I thought it was 7 books that where taken out.
Cheers!

As far as I can tell, no books of the NT are missing, they are the same in both bibles. It is the Apocrypha that is missing from the OT.
Joseph Smith received revelation concerning that in answer to a question he had about them:

“Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocrypha—There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly;

“There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men.

“Verily, I say unto you, that it is not needful that the Apocrypha should be translated.

“Therefore, whoso readeth it, let him understand, for the Spirit manifesteth truth;

“And whoso is enlightened by the Spirit shall obtain benefit therefrom;

“And whoso receiveth not by the Spirit, cannot be benefited. Therefore it is not needful that it should be translated. Amen.”

 

[Publisher]

THe Mormons do not use the old testament that Jesus used???

I know of very few Christians that use the Hebrew Bible Jesus used. Those who came to be called “Christians” and used the LXX did so because they were Greek speaking people. The writers of the gospels were Greek speakers…so they used the LXX…Jesus used the Hebrew scriptures…doubtful he used the LXX which was used mostly by the Diaspora…not Palestinian Jews.

 

[Javl]

Your last paragraph shows that you are not really interested in the answer to the questions you have asked, therefore I will not waste my time in trying to answer them.

Typical LDS tactic Zerinus. Can’t you answer those questions? Of course I am interested in the LDS answers. That paragraph is just the mainline Christian explanation of why we believe the way we do.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

I know of very few Christians that use the Hebrew Bible Jesus used. Those who came to be called “Christians” and used the LXX did so because they were Greek speaking people. The writers of the gospels were Greek speakers…so they used the LXX…Jesus used the Hebrew scriptures…doubtful he used the LXX which was used mostly by the Diaspora…not Palestinian Jews.

Yes, that is true, but it was proven that the present day Tanakh was about the same word for word with the Hebrew ( not Aramaic or Greek ) Qum Ram scrolls of the Essenes. The Tanakh and the Torah are supposedly written in classical Hebrew which are copied letter for letter from the ancient scrolls. To make sure no errors or changes enter into Hebtew scripture, a copied scroll is discarded and done over again if one character is in error, no corrections to or on the scroll are made, even if it is the last letter copied on to the scroll.

So, I believe that the Christian version of the Old Testament is comparable to that used by Jesus since it is from the Hebrew Tanakh. Shalom haMeshiach

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Publisher]

Yes, that is true, but it was proven that the present day Tanakh was about the same word for word with the Hebrew ( not Aramaic or Greek ) Qum Ram scrolls of the Essenes. The Tanakh and the Torah are supposedly written in classical Hebrew which are copied letter for letter from the ancient scrolls. To make sure no errors or changes enter into Hebtew scripture, a copied scroll is discarded and done over again if one character is in error, no corrections to or on the scroll are made, even if it is the last letter copied on to the scroll.

So, I believe that the Christian version of the Old Testament is comparable to that used by Jesus since it is from the Hebrew Tanakh. Shalom haMeshiach

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

I believe there are variations in the LXX which are not found in the Tanakh…the early Christians, who were mostly Greek speakers and readers, poured over the LXX to find the “prophesies” they could attribute to Jesus of Nazareth…they typically used isolated phrases and passages which has no “prophetic” connotations. They also “spiritualized” some of the texts to give credence to some of the doctrines developed in what later became the established church by the 4th century.

Mariology was “read” into the Hebrew scriptures to develop the believe in her being the new ark of the covenant or “queen mother” etc. Paul’s “New Adam” for Jesus gave rise to Mary being the “New Eve”…

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

As far as I can tell, no books of the NT are missing, they are the same in both bibles. It is the Apocrypha that is missing from the OT.
Joseph Smith received revelation concerning that in answer to a question he had about them:

God referred to it as the Apocrypha???

 

[zerinus]

1 ) what parts of the Bible were corrupted?

I don’t like to use the word “corrupted”. The Book of Mormon tells us that many “plain and precious parts” have been removed from it.

As for which parts they were, we know of some of them though modern revelation, as previously mentioned; and the rest remain to be revealed.

2 ) how do we know that they were/are corrupt?

Again, not corrupt, but incomplete.

How do we know? Because the Lord has revealed it to us, and there are also internal evidence within the Bible to support it.

3 ) how do we know that the “restored” parts of the Bible are correct?

In the same way that we know the non-restored parts are correct—by the revelations of the Holy Ghost.

4 ) If the Christian Bible in use today is still corrupt why does the LDS still use it as is?

Because we don’t believe it is “corrupt”. That is the language that you like to use, not us. Bits have gone missing from it, which is not the same as saying it is corrupt.

 

[Miriam1947]

I don’t like to use the word “corrupted”. The Book of Mormon tells us that many “plain and precious parts” have been removed from it.

As for which parts they were, we know of some of them though modern revelation, as previously mentioned; and the rest remain to be revealed.

Again, not corrupt, but incomplete.

How do we know? Because the Lord has revealed it to us, and there are also internal evidence within the Bible to support it.

In the same way that we know the non-restored parts are correct—by the revelations of the Holy Ghost.

Because we don’t believe it is “corrupt”. That is the language that you like to use, not us. Bits have gone missing from it, which is not the same as saying it is corrupt.

Modern revelation? Don’t think so. Mormonism is a completely man-made religion.