Mormons left out some books? A question worth discussing

  • Thread starter Thread starter PattyPryor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PattyPryor

Guest
:crossrc: :getholy: So I was thinking about how the Mormons have thier “sacred” scriptures and I got to thinking how funny it was that since God gave Joseph Smith all those extra books why did he leave out

Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
Additions to Daniel:
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

(hopefully I have those right 🙂 )

I guess I just sort of think it is silly God would forget those 👍
 
The Mormons did not leave out those books. They were part of the Torah in Jesus’ time. Later the Jews dropped them, and the Protestants followed along.

However, certain parts of the “Apocrypha” are significant in understanding Mormonism, particularly the story of Susanna and the Elders in Daniel. 😃 The authors of the BOM did include other bits and pieces, but I’m not an authority on that.
 
Jerusha said:
The Mormons did not leave out those books. They were part of the Torah in Jesus’ time. Later the Jews dropped them, and the Protestants followed along.

However, certain parts of the “Apocrypha” are significant in understanding Mormonism, particularly the story of Susanna and the Elders in Daniel. 😃 The authors of the BOM did include other bits and pieces, but I’m not an authority on that.
Click to expand...
oh really I don’t remember seeing that in thier bible
 
zerinus has pointed out that some epistles were lost as well, and history does say that. I wonder why God didn’t bring those back?
 
PattyPryor said:
:crossrc: :getholy: So I was thinking about how the Mormons have thier “sacred” scriptures and I got to thinking how funny it was that since God gave Joseph Smith all those extra books why did he leave out

Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
Additions to Daniel:
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

(hopefully I have those right 🙂 )

I guess I just sort of think it is silly God would forget those 👍
Click to expand...
don’t think too much. mr. smith left out those books so they can call themselves mormons.GOD bless & prayers to all! 😉
 
PattyPryor said:
:crossrc: :getholy: So I was thinking about how the Mormons have thier “sacred” scriptures and I got to thinking how funny it was that since God gave Joseph Smith all those extra books why did he leave out

Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
Additions to Daniel:
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

(hopefully I have those right 🙂 )

I guess I just sort of think it is silly God would forget those 👍
Click to expand...
I always thought that they did not have the deuterocanonical books because the Mormon (LDS) Church was a creation of the american restorationist movement, which grew out of the protestant tradition in the United States in the 19th century. It makes sense that the LDS would adopt a canon that excluded the same books that editions of the the KJV of that era generally excluded altogether. IMHO, it is just another way that the LDS shows itself to be just another flavor of protestantism.

Peace,
-Robert
 
The “New Translation” by Joseph Smith removes the Song of Songs from the canon as well. It’s no surprise some of the other “books” are also not there.
 
PattyPryor said:
:crossrc: :getholy: So I was thinking about how the Mormons have thier “sacred” scriptures and I got to thinking how funny it was that since God gave Joseph Smith all those extra books why did he leave out

Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
Additions to Daniel:
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

(hopefully I have those right 🙂 )

I guess I just sort of think it is silly God would forget those 👍
Click to expand...
God didn’t leave them out or forget them. The silly Mormons did.
 
If one reads Grant Palmer’s book An Insider’s View to Mormonism one will find that during the time that JS supposedly translated what will become the BOM, he took out from the library their copy of the KJV Bible and at the time that copy at the time included the seven books (the Deutrocanonical books). And it is fact that the original KJV included those seven books–called them the Apocrypha. (The seven books were removed later on.) And it is also fact that the LDS (Mormons) use only the KJV along with their Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrines and Covenants. (Joseph Smith’s family, as well as Oliver Cowdery were afterall Protestants before they decided to found the Mormon church.)
 
Publisher said:
The “New Translation” by Joseph Smith removes the Song of Songs from the canon as well. It’s no surprise some of the other “books” are also not there.
Click to expand...
The Mormons don’t claim to even need the Bible at all. To paraphrase LeGrand Richards from his book “A Marvelous Work and a Wonder”, if all of the Bibles in the entire world were destroyed, Mormons could obtain all of the truth they needed simply by looking at the scriptures revealed through Joseph Smith. I think the exclusion of the Apocrypha is more custom than anything else. And I understand the Protestants took them out of the KJV simply because they could get the same price for their Bibles without them and it saved on the cost of printing them.
 
:confused: How can these books claim to be “left out” when they were not a part of the book in the first place? The Book of Mormon is not another rendition of the bible. It is a separate record recorded by prophets who were on the American Continent. It is a second witness that Jesus is the Christ.

However, on the note of “left out” (I prefer lost) records, both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are compilations. Naturally, there are missing records in both books. This is evidenced by reference to various prophets/prophecies/writings of which we have no record. 🤷 But why worry about it? The important issue is that all doctrines pertinent to our salvation can be found within these two books. I am sure if God feels we need a little additional information he will drop a book or two.
 
Jash said:
:confused: How can these books claim to be “left out” when they were not a part of the book in the first place? The Book of Mormon is not another rendition of the bible. It is a separate record recorded by prophets who were on the American Continent. It is a second witness that Jesus is the Christ.

However, on the note of “left out” (I prefer lost) records, both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are compilations. Naturally, there are missing records in both books. This is evidenced by reference to various prophets/prophecies/writings of which we have no record. 🤷 But why worry about it? The important issue is that all doctrines pertinent to our salvation can be found within these two books. I am sure if God feels we need a little additional information he will drop a book or two.
Click to expand...
There is nothing lost from the Bible, the compilation was very deliberate and based on Sacred Tradition. The KJV however has had books purposely removed from it by the Church of England.

And no, there is One and only One who is pertinent to our salvation and that is Jesus Christ, who died, rose and will come again. There is nothing in a fictional work such as the BoM that can add to that.
 
There is nothing lost from the Bible
Click to expand...
Which rendition of the bible are you referring to?
there is One and only One who is pertinent to our salvation and that is Jesus Christ, who died, rose and will come again.
Click to expand...
I think I agree with you on that one.

I will not argue in this forum about whether or not the Book of Mormon is “fictional.” That is a matter of personal conviction which comes only through reading and praying to God about the book. Personally, I know the book testifies of Jesus Christ, and that it teaches salvation comes only in, through and by him. I also know that the teachings of the Book of Mormon compliment those found in the bible.
 
Jash said:
Which rendition of the bible are you referring to?
Click to expand...
The Bible.
I think I agree with you on that one.
Click to expand...
I will not argue in this forum about whether or not the Book of Mormon is “fictional.” That is a matter of personal conviction which comes only through reading and praying to God about the book. Personally, I know the book testifies of Jesus Christ, and that it teaches salvation comes only in, through and by him. I also know that the teachings of the Book of Mormon compliment those found in the bible.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know, you are only here to bear your testimony of the truthfulness of the “gospel”.
 
Jash said:
Personally, I know the book testifies of Jesus Christ, and that it teaches salvation comes only in, through and by him. I also know that the teachings of the Book of Mormon compliment those found in the bible.
Click to expand...
The same could be said about any book by Billy Graham or Fulton J. Sheen.

The question is not “do I like what the Book of Mormon says?”. The question is “is the Book of Mormon an authentic ancient text written between 600 BC and 421 AD?”. If not, then it is just an imaginative story with some Sidney Rigdon sermons thrown in.

And yes, I’ve read it several times.

Paul (a former Mormon)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top