Does the Book of Mormon contradict the Bible?

Wyatt's claims have been discussed here. Wyatt was no only unqualified, he was incompetent as an archaeologist, used nonsensical methods and had a habit of making wild claims without significant evidence.You need to establish the authenticity of Wyatt's "evidence" before using it. Ideally in a new thread, since it is hardly related to discussion of how the Book of Mormon disagrees with the Bible.

This makes it the BibleSorry, cant agree with you. The modern Bible only became known as the Bible after the Texus Receptus was transelated into The Kings language. (King James) Before that it was known as the Bishops Bible (Vulgate) that only the Priests of the Catholic church were allowed to read, and prior to that, it was known as the law and the Apostolic letters.The issue is, that This Book is the only book that encompasses the Christian Faith.

THE Gospel? THE GOSPEL? ROFLMAO... Last time I checked there are many thousands of versions of Gospel, ranging from Jesus being Levitical reinforcement, to Grace-only Salvation.You make it seem as though hearing one brand of Christianity is the same as hearing all brands, and that there is no person in the USA that has not heard all brands of Christianity.Unfortunately this is false. There are very few Americans familiar with every Christian Sects "take" on "the" Gospel. For your line of reasoning to hold merit, all brands of Christianity would have to lead to Salvation. More time to find their way around what, exactly? You have posted nothing but your own opinion. Like I stated before... In all of your posts on this thread, you have not cited scripture once.IMHO this line of yours is more projection than anything else. Let's disregard those brainwashing bits and focus on that last part, uncontrolled. That's all religion is really about, control. After all, the word Heretic means; "One who can chose".Now for those brainwashing bits. Let's look at how much of the conversion, and maintenance process applies to these techniques in brainwashing:1. Assault on identity
(YOU ARE A "SINNER" & "THINK INCORRECTLY")2. Guilt
(YOU COMMIT SINS "Jesus" HAD TO DIE FOR)3. Self-betrayal
(THE INDIVIDUAL ACCEPTS THEY ARE A "SINNER")4. Breaking point
(INDIVIDUAL IS NO LONGER CONNECTED TO WHO THEY WERE)5. Leniency
(INDIVIDUAL NOW IS LENIENT TOWARD "CORRECT THINKING")6. Compulsion to confess
(WHO HASN'T HEARD THIS ONE BEFORE?)7. Channeling of guilt
(HAVING ACCEPTED THEIR BEING A "SINNER" THEY ARE THEN DIRECTED AT THE TRUE BLAME, THEIR OLD SELF.)8. Releasing of guilt
(YOU ARE A NEW PERSON NOW, AND JESUS CAN SAVE YOU)9. Progress and harmony
(INTEGRATION COMPLETE, BEHAVIOR CHANGED)10. Final confession and rebirth
("BORN AGAIN") Save your self-righteous, brain washing megalomania.

quote:

---

THE Gospel?

---

The one that Paul preached. He wrote about it in the Bible. Bibles are widely available in Texas.Like guns. Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

Cite sources please, in a new topic. Also I would suggest in your new topic, you discuss how a known fictional story can refer to real places, and still be considered fictional.

You are right by saying that authenticity needs to be proofed in order to prove. You are also right by saying this is a new trhread, however I refer you back to me original argument and then you wil see how we ended up here. The notion is to deliberate in order to disprove or aprove, or is it to learn and teach?? Point in standing is, If I believe the K'oran is the Gospel, then surely Mormon's books don't settle the argument. But in this case, we need to establish then the authenticity of Joseph Smith, considdering that he virtually rewrote the bible in his own version. Based on that version we have this discussion...

Are you a Mormon, Bluejay?

---

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

If you considder reality to be fiction, then so be it. God, (I AM), YHWH is spirit. Therefore Spirit is Reality. Because He Is, He was and He will be, Therefore the eternaty of mankind in flesh is but 80 years, the eternity of mankind, made by The Spirit, in the spirit is therefore..Forever. (was and is and will be).Like i said, we need to establish the authenticity first, then we can discuss these issues. Even under a new topic if you like.

Alright, I followed the posts back and it seems that even your first post was off-topic, addressing nothing in the OP. The whole thing should have been in a new thread.(And by the way if you have any serious evidence to back up Ron Wyatt's claims do please start a new thread to produce it. Everybody else who brings it up seems to be unable to find any.)

Hi, KBertsche. Perhaps you should have tried assuming that I wasn't talking about Paul or Augustine, but Jesus. It kind of follows from the observation that I was quoting Jesus, and not Paul or Augustine, talking about works and salvation.You don't get much more historical than Jesus.Edited by Bluejay, : Additions and restructuring.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Hyroglyphx.Bluejay is a Mormon.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Iano.Thanks for your patient, detailed exposition of your viewpoint. I think I’ve gained a bit of understanding about your beliefs from this.However, I seems to me that your contextual analysis has replaced a couple of things that Jesus actually said with a couple of things that you decided, beforehand, that he must be saying, and in so doing, have changed the meaning. But, this is not what Jesus said. This is clear from the fact that He later (v. 28) confirms that his apostles (some of them, at least) have lived up to this condition, which indicates that the condition to which He is referring is not something that is impossible for men.So, I believe a more appropriate interpretation of this is that our salvation is contingent upon us doing something that we are fully capable of doing. The context of this story seems to support this much more clearly.----- I realize that this interpretation isn’t derived only from this scripture, but I think your interpretation is also at odds with Jesus’s direct statement.Basically, this could be interpreted two ways:

1. My way: If you do X, you will receive...
2. Your way: People who will receive... do X.
   ​
   Where X = leave family and home.

Basically, my way is to interpret this as a mechanistic statement: doing X brings about Y.Your way is to interpret X as a way for the disciples to identify those who will get Y, but X actually has nothing to do with why they will get Y.Grammatically, either interpretation is trivially correct, but one of them is disingenuous, at best. If I were to say, Blonde-haired people get ice cream, wouldn’t you automatically conclude that having blonde hair is the reason those people get ice cream? Well, you should, because that’s the implication of that statement. However, you would have me interpret such as sentence as saying, all people who deserve to have ice cream also have blonde hair, which is actually an entirely different statement.In effect, it’s speaking backwards: instead of meaning, Doing X gets you into heaven, it’s supposed to mean, Getting into heaven causes you to do X. This is the exact opposite of what is actually said. It gives me the impression that you believe Jesus is trying to cleverly deceive people by grammatically attaching the outcome to a consequence of the reason they deserve the outcome, rather than to the actual reason why they deserve the outcome.Why would Jesus speak in such a fashion if His goal is to clearly and concisely teach correct doctrines? It is, frankly, a deceptive way of speaking. I do not personally feel that such deliberate deception is compatible with the compassionate character that we attribute to Jesus. I feel that it is beyond my power to accept both Jesus’s compassion and the deceptive speech patterns that you attribute to Him.----- Sure, no problem.Essentially all men, with few exceptions, will receive salvation. This means that they will be resurrected, and will go to heaven (we like to use the term degree of glory instead of heaven). Degrees of glory are wonderful, blissful places where we can live forever. Again, all men are granted these.Of course, some degrees of glory are better than others, and the purpose of good works is to increase your degree of glory. And, basically, as your degree of glory increases, your degree of separation from God (i.e. spiritual death) decreases.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

quote:

---

kbertsche writes:

​

I assumed that your statement "the historic Christian faith was a faith of salvation by works" means that you do not understand the historic Christian faith (i.e. Paul's writings and their influence on Christian doctrine as evidenced in Augustinian/Pelagian controversy). Or perhaps you really do understand Paul and Augustine and you are deliberately misrepresenting them?

Perhaps you should have tried assuming that I wasn't talking about Paul or Augustine, but Jesus. It kind of follows from the observation that I was quoting Jesus, and not Paul or Augustine, talking about works and salvation.

​

You don't get much more historical than Jesus.

---

I used the phrase "historic Christian faith" intentionally, rather than "New Testament Christianity," "Jesus," or "Paul." The "historic Christian faith" includes not only Jesus, Paul, and the entire New Testament, but also the development of Christian doctrine throughout church history. The doctrines of the Trinity, the deity of Jesus, and salvation by grace alone are part of the historic Christian faith.

quote:

---

The doctrines of the Trinity, the deity of Jesus, and salvation by grace alone are part of the historic Christian faith.

---

For pagans- Catholics, Calvinists and Mormons. Christians believe in sola Scriptura, that the history of the church will not be written until the last day.Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

Nope. You've been tricked by the Devil. Sorry for your luck.