The List of Incongruence of COTPOTCOJCOLDS and the Book of Mormon

[_Inconceivable]

The concept of a Penecostal Born Again experience (like Enos, Alma, Alma & Lamoni etc)

Secret combinations condemned (blood oaths, signs & tokens etc)

If seeking riches, it is only after obtaining a hope in Christ, and only to feed the captive, cloth the hungry and liberate the naked (or something like that).

Setting the heart of the church upon the things of this world (Lavish temples, downtown Salt Lake, corporations, vast land holdings etc.)

Rameumpton meetings condemned (fast & testibaloney meetings).

[_Darth J]

and only to feed the captive, cloth the hungry and liberate the naked (or something like that)

Sounds like a party in the Goddess Suite!

P.S. Liz, look what a sexist pig I was in my comments about the Book of Mormon. Maybe I need to be taught a lesson.

[_Darth J]

Let's also remember the story of King Benjamin, "laboring with mine own hands that I might serve you."

Oh, those good old days, when the Native American Hebrews had a king who became a prophet.

Not like today, where we have a prophet we turn into a king.

[_greentam]

I've been interested lately, but haven't had time (so much Japanese homework! *sigh*) but wanted to do more reading on the mentions of Hell scattered throughout the B.O.M./DnC. While LDS I never actually believed in Hell (even less now..) because of the descriptions of the 3 kingdoms. But people in Book of Mormon/DC have a way of bringing it up a lot in the Biblical sense of hellfire and brimstone. This has become quite the contradiction for me and I've been having a hard time reconciling the difference in belief from the Telestial kingdom to Hell.

[_beefcalf]

What, no apologists?

No explanations on how the critics have it all wrong?

No rationalizations? No defenses? No retorts?

Can we take this to mean that those who considered the Book of Mormon to be the keystone of Mormonism are starting to reconsider?

[_GR33N]

It must be quite the shock to the belief system of new converts, those that actually read the Book of Mormon before they were dunked to be Mormons, to then learn that the COJCOLDS they've joined on the strength of the Book of Mormon does these things that beefcalf has listed out for us, and appear again below:

• Father and Son each a personage of flesh - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Temple Ceremonies - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Baptisms for the Dead - Specified as unnecessary.
• Pre-existence - Not there.
• Three degrees of Glory - Conspicuously Absent.
• 'Hell' reserved only for the sons of perdition - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Eternal Marriage - Missing.
• Polygamy - Condemned, no less.
• Modern view of the Priesthood and its Offices - Not there.

Boy there's a lot of stuff here... I'll address the first one.

There are lots of sources other than the Book of Mormon that specifically address this concept but I'll stick to the point that there seems to be no mention of it in the Book of Mormon.

Let's also consider the intended purpose of the Book of Mormon: "to show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations—And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."

I'll submit 3 Nephi 28:10 And for this cause ye shall have fulness of joy; and ye shall sit down in the kingdom of my Father; yea, your joy shall be full, even as the Father hath given me fulness of joy; and ye shall be even as I am, and I am even as the Father; and the Father and I are one;

If we can be as He is, and He is as the Father isn't it possible that includes having a physical body?

[_stemelbow]

Here, beefcalf began a very interesting list of how COJCOLDS today differs from what is 'taught' in the Book of Mormon. The first eight are beefcalf's original listing entries; subsequent additions from later posts are attributed to the contributing poster:

• Father and Son each a personage of flesh - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Temple Ceremonies - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Baptisms for the Dead - Specified as unnecessary*.
• Pre-existence - Not there.
• Three degrees of Glory - Conspicuously Absent.
• 'Hell' reserved only for the sons of perdition - Not in the Book of Mormon.
• Eternal Marriage - Missing.
• Polygamy - Condemned, no less.
• Modern view of the Priesthood and its Offices - Not there.
• The concept of a Penecostal Born Again experience (like Enos, Alma, Alma & Lamoni etc)--Inconceivable added.
• Secret combinations condemned (blood oaths, signs & tokens[, Council of Fifty, secrecy regarding "polygamy"--sp added] etc)--Inconceivable added.
• If seeking riches, it is only after obtaining a hope in Christ, and only to feed the captive, cloth the hungry and liberate the naked (or something like that)--Inconceivable added.
• Setting the heart of the church upon the things of this world (Lavish temples, downtown Salt Lake, corporations, vast land holdings etc.)--Inconceivable added.
• Rameumpton meetings condemned (fast & testibaloney meetings)--Inconceivable added.
• Let's also remember the story of King Benjamin, "laboring with mine own hands that I might serve you."--Darth J added.
• Oh, those good old days, when the Native American Hebrews had a king who became a prophet--Darth J added.
• Not like today, where we have a prophet we turn into a king--Darth J added.

This thread was started so that other MDB readers/posters can add those that they have observed and noticed.

*Edited per beefcalf's corrective post

So is it assumed by the critics here that the Church should limit its teachings to what is found in the Book of Mormon?

[_stemelbow]

Boy there's a lot of stuff here... I'll address the first one.

There are lots of sources other than the Book of Mormon that specifically address this concept but I'll stick to the point that there seems to be no mention of it in the Book of Mormon.

Let's also consider the intended purpose of the Book of Mormon: "to show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations—And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."

I'll submit 3 Nephi 28:10 And for this cause ye shall have fulness of joy; and ye shall sit down in the kingdom of my Father; yea, your joy shall be full, even as the Father hath given me fulness of joy; and ye shall be even as I am, and I am even as the Father; and the Father and I are one;

If we can be as He is, and He is as the Father isn't it possible that includes having a physical body?

And when Jesus arrived for His visit, He surely had a physical body.

Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.

[_beefcalf]

Here, beefcalf began a very interesting list of how COJCOLDS today differs from what is 'taught' in the Book of Mormon. The first eight are beefcalf's original listing entries; subsequent additions from later posts are attributed to the contributing poster:

... snip

So is it assumed by the critics here that the Church should limit its teachings to what is found in the Book of Mormon?

No, it is assumed that a church and the book upon which it is founded might resemble each other in some small way.

It is not assumed that the critical and unique teachings of a church would be absent (or condemned) in the very book they claim as a foundation.

[_stemelbow]

No, it is assumed that a church and the book upon which it is founded might resemble each other in some small way.

Agreed. So, are you then proposing by this list that the Church and the Book of Mormon teachings do not resemble each other in some small way? If so, then rest assured there is plenty more to the teachings of the Church and the teachings of the Book of Mormon then what is listed. Number one: Jesus is the Christ the Savior of the World. Such a teaching, even if it be a small resemblance of each other, is forwarded by both.

It is not assumed that the critical and unique teachings of a church would be absent (or condemned) in the very book they claim as a foundation.

Cool. So you don't even assume that much huh? Well good. I see nothing to discuss then.

Thanks for the thread. Not much to discuss but hopefully we worked something out.