It's all over. Adieu

[freedomforall]

Good point, ClarkKent.
I came across this book this morning. Something to consider:

About Shaken Faith Syndrome
In today’s Internet world, an increasing number of Latter-day Saints are encountering anti-Mormon material. Since most members don't have all the answers at their fingertips, LDS-critical claims can be unsettling or create doubt. Some arguments have caused a few members-even active members with strong testimonies-to lose their faith.

Backed by extensive research and decades of experience dealing with anti-Mormon allegations, Michael Ash explores how we can be both critical thinkers and devout believers.

Because misconceptions can make us vulnerable to a shaken faith, the first half of this book offers suggestions on how we can strengthen our intellectual foundations against challenging issues. Ash invites us to fortify our testimonies as we develop a more mature appreciation of the role of prophets and personal revelation, as well as a greater understanding of the inherent limitations of science, history, and even the scriptures. The second half of this book exposes common anti-LDS tactics and engages some of the most frequent criticisms.

http://shakenfaithsyndrome.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now my faith is shaken because no one commented on my posting of a good book. :-w

[natasha]

Thanks for the "heads up" on the book....looks really interesting and would be a worthwhile addition to anyone's library!

[jo1952]

Good point, ClarkKent.
I came across this book this morning. Something to consider:

About Shaken Faith Syndrome
In today’s Internet world, an increasing number of Latter-day Saints are encountering anti-Mormon material. Since most members don't have all the answers at their fingertips, LDS-critical claims can be unsettling or create doubt. Some arguments have caused a few members-even active members with strong testimonies-to lose their faith.

Backed by extensive research and decades of experience dealing with anti-Mormon allegations, Michael Ash explores how we can be both critical thinkers and devout believers.

Because misconceptions can make us vulnerable to a shaken faith, the first half of this book offers suggestions on how we can strengthen our intellectual foundations against challenging issues. Ash invites us to fortify our testimonies as we develop a more mature appreciation of the role of prophets and personal revelation, as well as a greater understanding of the inherent limitations of science, history, and even the scriptures. The second half of this book exposes common anti-LDS tactics and engages some of the most frequent criticisms.

http://shakenfaithsyndrome.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Michael Ash did his homework. This book is educational and useful. His book, "Of Faith and Reason---80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith", is also worthwhile.

[jbalm]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. And its fruits leave quite a bit to be desired.

Christ was plain. Repent; Be baptized; endure to the end.

But most people are uncomfortable with simplicity, so they add layer upon layer of needless complexity: Mysteries, money, men, rules, buildings, secrets... Maybe some people feel like by solving an extremely complex riddle, they are more worthy of Christ's approval. But I really don't think that is the case.

The real "test," apparently, is taking Christ at his own word, without allowing someone who claims authority to "interpret" the Word, and twist it to suit his/her own agenda. For whatever reason, His simple message is impossible for many to accept. A difficult test indeed.

What church did Christ belong to again?

[BroJones]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. ...

Very sorry to hear you say that, jbalm. Question -- does your statement apply to the Book of Mormon?
(which has brought me to Christ more than any other book)

[ajax]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. And its fruits leave quite a bit to be desired.

The church, the system, the corp - yes, they certainly can be. The BoM itself helps us come to Christ.

Christ was plain. Repent; Be baptized; endure to the end.

I don't think he just wants us to endure. He wants us to enter His presence, in mortality, like, pronto.

But most people are uncomfortable with simplicity, so they add layer upon layer of needless complexity: Mysteries, money, men, rules, buildings, secrets... Maybe some people feel like by solving an extremely complex riddle, they are more worthy of Christ's approval. But I really don't think that is the case.

Si Senor.

The real "test," apparently, is taking Christ at his own word, without allowing someone who claims authority to "interpret" the Word, and twist it to suit his/her own agenda. For whatever reason, His simple message is impossible for many to accept. A difficult test indeed.

Looks like you're ready for Daymon Smith's Cultural History of the Book of Mormon 5 vol series where he goes about proving the BoM was highjacked from the very beginning by other/outside interpretations or METATEXT as he calls them, which ended up informing our views rather than the book itself.

What church did Christ belong to again?

[freedomforall]

Thanks for the "heads up" on the book....looks really interesting and would be a worthwhile addition to anyone's library!

If it's Winwood's book you're referring to it is a good book. I read it a long time ago, even gave some copies away. Now I'm down to one. I have a 1997 printing.
Another good book is called "Are Mormons Christians" by Stephen E Robinson. He was a Chair and Professor of Ancient History at BYU, if I remember correctly. My wife and I used to go to -Know Your Religion- Seminars in the 90's. He was one of the participants of that circuit, and was/is a very good speaker.

[Lizzy60]

I'm not speaking for jbalm, of course, but it is my opinion that The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a stumbling block. However, the Book of Mormon has also brought me to Christ. It teaches of Him, testifies of Him, and was essentially written by Him. I maintain that if I were to teach in Church many of the truths that are taught in the Book of Mormon, I could end up fighting for my membership. I would LOVE to get rid of the chapter headings.

[ajax]

I would LOVE to get rid of the chapter headings.

You mean Bruce R's commentary for us?

[Lizzy60]

I would LOVE to get rid of the chapter headings.

You mean Bruce R's commentary for us?

You got it!!

[freedomforall]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. And its fruits leave quite a bit to be desired.

Christ was plain. Repent; Be baptized; endure to the end.

But most people are uncomfortable with simplicity, so they add layer upon layer of needless complexity: Mysteries, money, men, rules, buildings, secrets... Maybe some people feel like by solving an extremely complex riddle, they are more worthy of Christ's approval. But I really don't think that is the case.

The real "test," apparently, is taking Christ at his own word, without allowing someone who claims authority to "interpret" the Word, and twist it to suit his/her own agenda. For whatever reason, His simple message is impossible for many to accept. A difficult test indeed.

What church did Christ belong to again?

Do you mean, which church is Christ's church? It is evident that whatever church is His is the one He belongs to, right?

[jbalm]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. ...

Very sorry to hear you say that, jbalm. Question -- does your statement apply to the Book of Mormon?
(which has brought me to Christ more than any other book)

I like the BOM. That it was translated from a set of gold plates seems unlikely. But it has a good message. I've said already that I believe one can lead an exemplary life by following the teachings of the BOM.

I take it for what it is.

I also quite like Les Miserables, and found it very uplifting. Nobody claims that Les Miserables is of divine origin, but it has a good message, and I believe that one can lead an exemplary life by following the teachings of Les Miserables.

It take it for what it is also.

I'm embarrassed to say, but I learned something from Seek The Truth (are you him too, Mark?) Scripture was written by men, and all men are fallible. You have you use your God-given discernment when you read anything, regardless of what the title page claims.

Every week during sacrament, we take the name of Christ upon us. That's really all I'm in it for. Everything else is just noise.

[jbalm]

This thread confirms what I have thought for a long time. Mormonism is just another self-imposed stumbling block keeping people from coming unto Christ. And its fruits leave quite a bit to be desired.

Christ was plain. Repent; Be baptized; endure to the end.

But most people are uncomfortable with simplicity, so they add layer upon layer of needless complexity: Mysteries, money, men, rules, buildings, secrets... Maybe some people feel like by solving an extremely complex riddle, they are more worthy of Christ's approval. But I really don't think that is the case.

The real "test," apparently, is taking Christ at his own word, without allowing someone who claims authority to "interpret" the Word, and twist it to suit his/her own agenda. For whatever reason, His simple message is impossible for many to accept. A difficult test indeed.

What church did Christ belong to again?

Do you mean, which church is Christ's church? It is evident that whatever church is His is the one He belongs to, right?

That isn't what I meant.

I'm from the position that Christ regards all churches more or less equally.

[BroJones]

Jbalm: I'm from the position that Christ regards all churches more or less equally.

But didn't Jesus say to Joseph:

" 18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them;

[jbalm]

I'm not speaking for jbalm, of course, but it is my opinion that The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a stumbling block. However, the Book of Mormon has also brought me to Christ. It teaches of Him, testifies of Him, and was essentially written by Him. I maintain that if I were to teach in Church many of the truths that are taught in the Book of Mormon, I could end up fighting for my membership. I would LOVE to get rid of the chapter headings.

I agree about the BOM. I would guess Aussie does too.

Everyone here is getting all worked up about one particular point here and there, and getting all mad. We shouldn't overstate the significance of the study mentioned in the OP. All is does is take various so-called Hebraisms and other linguistic peculiarities and removes them from the "proof the BOM is true" category. That's it. It is actually an arrow in the quiver of any LDS apologist who subscribes to the "loose translation" theory. The people who are most worked up over this, it seems, are the "tight translation" people.

I didn't read the BOM entirely until I was in my 30s. I was shocked at how much I liked it, and at how much sense it made.

At the same time, I was very uneasy. It took a while for me to realize that the BOM does not equate to the CoJCoLDS. The church doesn't have any more right to claim the BOM than any of the other dozens of offshoots from Joseph Smith's religion.

The church seems to have "outgrown" the BOM anyway, so any discussion of the BOM's historicity is mostly academic from an LDS perspective. All doctrine now seems to come from loosely-quoted GAs loosely quoting other GAs.

[ajax]

At the same time, I was very uneasy. It took a while for me to realize that the BOM does not equate to the CoJCoLDS. The church doesn't have any more right to claim the BOM than any of the other dozens of offshoots from Joseph Smith's religion.

The church seems to have "outgrown" the BOM anyway, so any discussion of the BOM's historicity is mostly academic from an LDS perspective. All doctrine now seems to come from loosely-quoted GAs loosely quoting other GAs.

+1

[jbalm]

Jbalm: I'm from the position that Christ regards all churches more or less equally.

But didn't Jesus say to Joseph:

" 18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them;

I respect what you are saying. Again, quoting a fallible man (and the whole first vision thing has its own problems). My point is, I have my understanding of the nature of God, and I have had what I imagine to be as good a witness as anyone's. And my understanding doesn't include God haggling over the finer points of various scripture.

Heck. I could summarize God's plan in two sentences:

"Don't make things worse. Once you've got that down, try to make things better."

All of this going back and forth doesn't do a thing for the second sentence, and probably violates the first.

I'm seeing BG's point now.

That being said, this is a discussion forum. Discussions will happen.

[BroJones]

The church seems to have "outgrown" the BOM anyway, so any discussion of the BOM's historicity is mostly academic from an LDS perspective. All doctrine now seems to come from loosely-quoted GAs loosely quoting other GAs.

Actually, they often quote the Book of Mormon-- and were given a big impetus to do this by President Benson.

In my little branch, the Book of Mormon is quoted often - in talks, in classes, in testimonies. We had a wonderful baptism in September. Another is scheduled for next month.

Question: how do you feel about Adam-ondi-Ahman? did Adam assemble his posterity there, and did Jesus visit them there? And will Jesus come yet again to that place for a significant meeting in the last days?

[jbalm]

Honestly--no idea.

[BroJones]

Honestly--no idea.

Would you think back -- did you previously believe it (about Jesus coming to Adam-ondi)?

[jbalm]

Actually, they often quote the Book of Mormon-- and were given a big impetus to do this by President Benson.

In my little branch, the Book of Mormon is quoted often - in talks, in classes, in testimonies. We had a wonderful baptism in September. Another is scheduled for next month.

Yes, it is quoted often, but we don't really LIVE it. LDS lives are all wrapped up in temple recommends, dietary restrictions, callings, tithing, home/visiting teaching, unquestioning loyalty, leadership hierarchies...all non-BOM stuff. The lds church is not defined by BOM teachings. The stuff we are told over the pulpit to spend our lives fretting about are mostly NOT found in the BOM

If the church were to actually embrace the BOM, it would be an entirely different experience.

[buffalo_girl]

I can fully understand becoming cynical about the institution of 'The Church', but I also have learned from 'sad experience' that I cannot progress spiritually in a vacuum - that is - without benefit of others within the 'faith' - even when they drive me nuts and fairly often, hurt my feelings.

WHERE does a 'believer' practice his/her Faith without being around others professing the same agreed upon LAW?

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/rom/12?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Romans 12
1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think;
but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:

5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us,

Please, read all of Romans 12.

[clarkkent14]

Actually, they often quote the Book of Mormon-- and were given a big impetus to do this by President Benson.

In my little branch, the Book of Mormon is quoted often - in talks, in classes, in testimonies. We had a wonderful baptism in September. Another is scheduled for next month.

Yes, it is quoted often, but we don't really LIVE it. LDS lives are all wrapped up in temple recommends, dietary restrictions, callings, tithing, home/visiting teaching, unquestioning loyalty, leadership hierarchies...all non-BOM stuff. The lds church is not defined by BOM teachings. The stuff we are told over the pulpit to spend our lives fretting about are mostly NOT found in the BOM

If the church were to actually embrace the BOM, it would be an entirely different experience.

The more you read the BOM the more you start to realize things are not aligning with what's going on in church. They are worlds apart. The puzzle pieces don't fit. Discovering Christ through the BOM is the challenge. A challenge few are up to. Others are concerned with those things, the outward, but finding Christ begins inward, and The Book of Mormon is a guide book given from those who found Him. Not only to say, but to DO. Rend that veil of unbelief.

[jo1952]

Jbalm: I'm from the position that Christ regards all churches more or less equally.

But didn't Jesus say to Joseph:

" 18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them;

Over time I have come to understand additional meaning to what was told to Joseph...wherein "they were all wrong". We must have a direct, personal relationship with God. That is what Joseph was manifesting, and what he was rewarded with. By seeking God on his own he sought and found God. Now, even though we have hung on to more clarifications of truth (they aren't "new" truths....just some "rediscovered" truth....and we don't have everything Joseph was taught; just some), we also have become creedal. We have become what Joseph was told not to join. We all must do the same thing; have a direct, personal relationship with God. Seek, and ye shall find. NOT, let someone else seek and depend upon what they find.

One of the ways the Church now has a form of godliness, but she denies the power thereof, is this: When an individual receives personal revelation which is not a part of correlated material, she denies the personal revelation. If it isn't correlated, you aren't allowed to speak or share it. The Church denies the very power of God to have either revealed truth to someone other than to her; and/or she denies the ability of other members to benefit from what was revealed to anyone other than to her.

[jbalm]

Honestly--no idea.

Would you think back -- did you previously believe it (about Jesus coming to Adam-ondi)?

I never gave it much thought. I guess I believed it in the same way that I believed everything else my parents told me.

I'm not sure what the point is. If it happens, it will be awesome, unless its one of those "it happened, but only me and a couple other guys were there so you have to trust us" kind of things.

Part of my point is why worry about it? Does believing that make me more or less able to live life the way God wants me too?

Can a good person be judged harshly because he may or may not have believed something about Adam-ondi-Ahman?

More and more, it becomes clear that we will be judged according to what we DO. Not what we BELIEVE. Nothing else makes sense.