Dadgum, I am not awake yet.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Apocrypha and Book of Enoch?
- Thread starter DeathIsNotTheEnd
- Start date
There are 66 books in the Bible as I read it. There are additional books in other versions, as you know, which are called the Apocrypha.
I am reminded of what Dr Chuck Missler said regarding the 66 books. Those 66 books are ‘integrated’ into a flow. ‘Integrated’, in my opinion, is a very good way of phrasing the Bible.
As I understand, and I’m no scholar, a large portion of the Book of Morman, is a reiteration of the stories of the Bible. In addition, the Koran is also, in large part, a rewrite of the Bible.
In both cases, the Koran was written around 1400 AD while the Book of Mornan was written in the 1800’s. While talking to a Saudi national in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, I asked him why he didn’t go by the original version of the stories?
There are many versions of the Bible. NIV, KJV, NKJV, NET and so on. In each of these versions, although problems exist in the interpretations of some of the rewrites, the interpreters tried to align with the original documents.
Specifically, the rewrite, B of M version, many new stories were added. Too many for me to take seriously. The B of M version is not a stand alone book. Joseph Smith felt the need to add scriptures written by the patriarchs of our faith to give his version credibility.
Due to the last paragraph I wrote, I, for one, am unable to give any credibility to the Book of Mormon.
This whole comment is solid gold!
C
Cap
Guest
To be the voice of moderation, it's a spiritual book that has value to many and therefore worth considering to understand how others spiritually think. If you have a good faith in God, as I believe most here do, I don't think you are in extreme danger.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”
Galatians 1:8 KJV
Galatians 1:8 KJV
My contention with the Book of Mormon would be condensed into disbelief in the Angel/tablet delivery. I have no reason to believe that Mr Smith was ever contacted by an Angel. The gross plagiarism exhibited throughout the entirety of his book would indicate that if it was truly a message from an Angel, that the Angel must have been directly revealing this information to multiple men in his proximity in the preceding decade, of which he is the last and only one to attempt to claim Angelic revelation.
It is far more reasonable IMO to conclude that the unexplainable level of conformity between the different men is due to plagiarism by Mr Smith of men in his geographical proximity and blending trusted Scripture with a vivid imagination rather than a common Angelic source.
If it were true that an Angel delivered the information directly, or if it were true that the golden tablets existed, then you would have to examine them in light of confirmation from known confirmed Scripture. Does B o M teach another Jesus, another gospel, another eternity? Are the archeological claims coincidental or substantial? What are the ultimate fruits of the message delivered?
It is far more reasonable IMO to conclude that the unexplainable level of conformity between the different men is due to plagiarism by Mr Smith of men in his geographical proximity and blending trusted Scripture with a vivid imagination rather than a common Angelic source.
If it were true that an Angel delivered the information directly, or if it were true that the golden tablets existed, then you would have to examine them in light of confirmation from known confirmed Scripture. Does B o M teach another Jesus, another gospel, another eternity? Are the archeological claims coincidental or substantial? What are the ultimate fruits of the message delivered?
It might have been a fallen angel, but also remember that Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
That sort of thing goes on more often than people realize.
C
Cap
Guest
Just as there are odd things about the Mormon religion, I find the Eucharist is an odd thing for the Catholic religion, along with purgatory, worshipping saints, and Mary. But somehow, the designation of evil doesn't carry the same weight when discussing all of man's created 'Christian' religions, accept the Mormons.
C
Cap
Guest
Probably because all man made religions have some falsity to them.
Let us not forget that we are in fact at war with these fallen angels and their demons/unclean spirits!
It’s quite easy to see a fallen angel at the origin and at the helm still of every false religion in the world!
It’s quite easy to see a fallen angel at the origin and at the helm still of every false religion in the world!
For all the other things that Catholics screw up they get Christ right.
Believe it or not, its actually Co opted from real Christianity. They changed it to fit their religious construct, just like tithe and priesthood.
Matthew 26:26-28
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it,and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
And he took the cup, and gave thanks (2168 eucharistéō), and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Barna did a survey many years ago that was eye-opening. They took seven core 'evangelical' beliefs (Christ lived a sinless life, the devil is a real being, bible is totally accurate in its teachings, etc) and surveyed a bunch of people, then broke the answers down according to denominations. I don't remember all the details, but I remember these two:
In later studies, Barna found that if you ask people whether they self-identify as 'evangelicals', you'll get a number in the 80+ percent range, but if you ask them about specific belief statements (seven or nine, depending on which survey), you'll get a depressing number in the teens.
My advice? Ignore labels completely and deal with people as individuals. Beware the naming fallacy—thinking that because you have applied a label to something/someone you actually understand it/them.
- More Mormons than Methodists believe that Christ lived a sinless life on earth.
- More people in the general population than Presbyterians believe the devil is a real being, not a symbol.
In later studies, Barna found that if you ask people whether they self-identify as 'evangelicals', you'll get a number in the 80+ percent range, but if you ask them about specific belief statements (seven or nine, depending on which survey), you'll get a depressing number in the teens.
My advice? Ignore labels completely and deal with people as individuals. Beware the naming fallacy—thinking that because you have applied a label to something/someone you actually understand it/them.
Was it Kiekegaard or Dick Van Patten who said "If you label me, you negate me."?
google says Kierkegaard.