Reasons people stopped attending church

[MG 2.0]

It is.

MG, can you tell me one unique teaching found in the Book of Mormon?

That would be a "No".

I think the list provided is pretty good for starters. Where specifically do you have a problem and why?

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

MG, can you tell me one unique teaching found in the Book of Mormon?

The Plan of Salvation and Premortal Existence

The Book of Mormon explicitly teaches that God had a plan for the salvation and exaltation of humanity prepared before the foundation of the world. This includes the doctrine of premortal foreordination, where individuals are called to priesthood roles according to God’s foreknowledge (Alma 13:3–10).

The phrase “plan of salvation” and similar terminology are found in the Book of Mormon but not in the Bible.

The Fall and Its Purpose

The Book of Mormon provides a distinctive interpretation of the Fall of Adam and Eve. It teaches that the Fall was a necessary part of God’s plan, enabling humanity to experience joy, have children, and progress. Lehi’s statement, “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy” (2 Nephi 2:25), is unique in its positive framing of the Fall.

Agency and Opposition

The principle of agency—humans’ ability to choose between good and evil—is a central theme. The Book of Mormon teaches that “there is an opposition in all things” (2 Nephi 2:11) and that individuals are “free to choose liberty and eternal life… or to choose captivity and death” (2 Nephi 2:27).

The Nature of God and the Godhead

The Book of Mormon affirms the unity of the Godhead while emphasizing that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinct beings, each bearing record of the others (see 3 Nephi 11:27).

It teaches that God is unchangeable, all-knowing, and perfectly loving (2 Nephi 9:20; Moroni 8:18; 1 Nephi 11:22).

The Atonement of Jesus Christ

The Book of Mormon provides detailed teachings about the Atonement, including the suffering of Christ in Gethsemane as a central part of the Atonement, not just His crucifixion.

It teaches that “no unclean thing can enter into [God’s] kingdom” and emphasizes the need for faith, repentance, baptism, and enduring to the end.

The Innocence of Children

The Book of Mormon teaches that children are innocent and not capable of sin, and therefore do not need baptism until they reach the age of accountability (see Moroni 8:10–12).

Revelation and Personal Guidance

The Book of Mormon demonstrates the importance of personal revelation and teaches that God continues to speak to individuals and guide them through the Holy Ghost.

Plain and Precious Truths

The Book of Mormon restores and clarifies many “plain and precious” truths that are considered lost or unclear in the Bible, such as the role of baptism before Christ, the necessity of enduring to the end, and the process of repentance.

Other Notable Teachings

The Book of Mormon addresses the reality and tactics of Satan, the necessity of prayer, the purpose of life as a probationary state, and the importance of gratitude, humility, and charity.

It teaches that the coming forth of the Book of Mormon itself is a sign of the gathering of Israel and the fulfillment of God’s covenants.
Perplexity A. I.

While some wording may be unique, not one of these doctrinal concepts is unique to The Book of Mormon.

This is kind of a Gish Gallop from A.I., where you didn't even post the wording of the question you used to solicit your answer.

[Physics Guy]

"Unique to the Book of Mormon" doesn't just mean "in the Book of Mormon but not in the Bible". Plenty of religious ideas, even ones considered Christian by many self-professed Christians, are not explicitly stated in the Bible. They've been around, though, since long before 1830.

The idea that the Fall was a necessary part of God's plan, for example, has been in the Roman Catholic liturgy for Easter Vigil since the 8th century.

O certe necessarium Adæ peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est!
O felix culpa, quæ talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!
Oh so necessary sin of Adam, that was destroyed by Christ's death!
Oh happy fault, to have earned such a Redeemer!

This idea is no obscure thing pulled out of history, either. It was and has been prominent in Catholic worship and theology through the centuries even till now, and so it has also been well known and discussed in other Christian churches for centuries. By no means whatever is this a new idea from the Book of Mormon. I don't know when I first heard about "felix culpa" as an idea, but it was when I was a kid, and whoever it was explained it to me mentioned the Latin term—not the Book of Mormon.

All the things mentioned in MG 2.0's list have likewise been well-known ideas since long before 1830. These are doctrines which one can perfectly well accept, if one so decides, without ever needing to learn them from the Book of Mormon. Indeed the fact that all these popular post-Biblical ideas appear in the Book of Mormon is one of the best reasons to conclude that the Book of Mormon is a product of the 19th century, and not some Biblical era. If nobody had ever guessed them until the Book of Mormon revealed them, then that might be an argument for the Book of Mormon being authentically different at least, but in fact the non-Biblical concepts in the Book of Mormon line up damningly well with the popular non-Biblical concepts in American society of Joseph Smith's time.

[MG 2.0]

"Unique to the Book of Mormon" doesn't just mean "in the Book of Mormon but not in the Bible". Plenty of religious ideas, even ones considered Christian by many self-professed Christians, are not explicitly stated in the Bible. They've been around, though, since long before 1830.

The idea that the Fall was a necessary part of God's plan, for example, has been in the Roman Catholic liturgy for Easter Vigil since the 8th century.

O certe necessarium Adæ peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est!
O felix culpa, quæ talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!
Oh so necessary sin of Adam, that was destroyed by Christ's death!
Oh happy fault, to have earned such a Redeemer!

This idea is no obscure thing pulled out of history, either. It was and has been prominent in Catholic worship and theology through the centuries even till now, and so it has also been well known and discussed in other Christian churches for centuries. By no means whatever is this a new idea from the Book of Mormon. I don't know when I first heard about "felix culpa" as an idea, but it was when I was a kid, and whoever it was explained it to me mentioned the Latin term—not the Book of Mormon.

All the things mentioned in MG 2.0's list have likewise been well-known ideas since long before 1830. These are doctrines which one can perfectly well accept, if one so decides, without ever needing to learn them from the Book of Mormon. Indeed the fact that all these popular post-Biblical ideas appear in the Book of Mormon is one of the best reasons to conclude that the Book of Mormon is a product of the 19th century, and not some Biblical era. If nobody had ever guessed them until the Book of Mormon revealed them, then that might be an argument for the Book of Mormon being authentically different at least, but in fact the non-Biblical concepts in the Book of Mormon line up damningly well with the popular non-Biblical concepts in American society of Joseph Smith's time.

As with many other things that were part and parcel of the restoration the teachings were distilled into scripture between the covers of a book and given approbation by God. Other restoration doctrines and teachings were distillations and 'adding upon' to existing thought at the time and before Joseph Smith.

https://scripturecentral.org/knowhy/wha ... -of-Mormon

If the restoration hadn't occurred and God stepped in and a man stepped up to meet Him, which one of these doctrines and practices fleshed out in the Book of Mormon would have seen the light of day as a composite and restoration of all things?

In other words, if you subtract Joseph Smith and the prophets of the restoration these "well known ideas", as you put it, would have remained in isolation without ever becoming the life blood of a religious organization claiming to be a restoration of "all things" under heaven necessary to bring people to Christ in the fullness of times.

It is an interesting thing to consider where the world would be and where it would be headed without the restoration of Christ's church and gospel. As it is, we have a world in which Christian belief is on the wane. Religion in general is being dissed as old wive's tales. To have a message of restoration of all things, even those things that were 'sitting in the pews' at the time of Joseph Smith, is a marvelous message that in my opinion has changed the trajectory of of what is known vs. what was lost and/or became unknown.

And the Book of Mormon is the keystone scripture that acts as a witness of Jesus Christ and helps in the ongoing process of bringing all things back into one in regards to religious knowledge and truth.

But that, obviously, is the opinion of one person on this board. I don't expect to get a "Hurrah for Israel!" in these parts.

Regards,
MG

[sock puppet]

No "Hurrah for Israel" from me.

MG 2.0, do you agree with Joseph Smith's boast? You know, the one of having done what even Jesus couldn't?

[MG 2.0]

No "Hurrah for Israel" from me.

MG 2.0, do you agree with Joseph Smith's boast? You know, the one of having done what even Jesus couldn't?

It might be helpful to have a bit more context:

Joseph Smith’s so-called “boast”—that he had done what even Jesus could not—comes from a sermon delivered on May 26, 1844, just a month before his death. The context is crucial for understanding both the tone and intent of his statement.

The Setting and Content
Joseph Smith was addressing a congregation in Nauvoo, Illinois, during a period of intense persecution and internal dissent.

He began the sermon by reading the 11th chapter of 2 Corinthians, where the Apostle Paul uses irony and “boasting” to defend his ministry against critics. Paul’s rhetorical style in this chapter is self-consciously boastful, but meant to highlight the absurdity of his critics’ claims and to defend his apostolic authority.

Smith then adopted a similar rhetorical approach, stating:

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet…”

Interpretations and Reactions
Critics have cited this statement as evidence of arrogance or even blasphemy, suggesting Smith claimed to be greater than Jesus.

Defenders and some historians argue that Smith was using rhetorical irony, echoing Paul’s style, and that he was not literally claiming superiority over Jesus. Instead, he was emphasizing the loyalty of his followers in contrast to the biblical accounts of Jesus’ disciples fleeing at his arrest.

The context of persecution and Smith’s imminent danger (he would be killed within weeks) also shaped the tone of the sermon. He was defending his leadership and the unity of his church in the face of severe opposition.
Perplexity A.I.

I suppose you can take it how you want to.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

No "Hurrah for Israel" from me.

MG 2.0, do you agree with Joseph Smith's boast? You know, the one of having done what even Jesus couldn't?

It might be helpful to have a bit more context:

Joseph Smith’s so-called “boast”—that he had done what even Jesus could not—comes from a sermon delivered on May 26, 1844, just a month before his death. The context is crucial for understanding both the tone and intent of his statement.

The Setting and Content
Joseph Smith was addressing a congregation in Nauvoo, Illinois, during a period of intense persecution and internal dissent.

He began the sermon by reading the 11th chapter of 2 Corinthians, where the Apostle Paul uses irony and “boasting” to defend his ministry against critics. Paul’s rhetorical style in this chapter is self-consciously boastful, but meant to highlight the absurdity of his critics’ claims and to defend his apostolic authority.

Smith then adopted a similar rhetorical approach, stating:

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet…”

Interpretations and Reactions
Critics have cited this statement as evidence of arrogance or even blasphemy, suggesting Smith claimed to be greater than Jesus.

Defenders and some historians argue that Smith was using rhetorical irony, echoing Paul’s style, and that he was not literally claiming superiority over Jesus. Instead, he was emphasizing the loyalty of his followers in contrast to the biblical accounts of Jesus’ disciples fleeing at his arrest.

The context of persecution and Smith’s imminent danger (he would be killed within weeks) also shaped the tone of the sermon. He was defending his leadership and the unity of his church in the face of severe opposition.
Perplexity A.I.

I suppose you can take it how you want to.

Regards,
MG

MG, just wondering:

1. What was your prompting question?

2. Do you agree with his boast?

[Moksha]

MG, thanks for giving credit to the A.I. that supplies your apologetic responses.

[sock puppet]

No "Hurrah for Israel" from me.

MG 2.0, do you agree with Joseph Smith's boast? You know, the one of having done what even Jesus couldn't?

It might be helpful to have a bit more context:

Joseph Smith’s so-called “boast”—that he had done what even Jesus could not—comes from a sermon delivered on May 26, 1844, just a month before his death. The context is crucial for understanding both the tone and intent of his statement.

The Setting and Content
Joseph Smith was addressing a congregation in Nauvoo, Illinois, during a period of intense persecution and internal dissent.

He began the sermon by reading the 11th chapter of 2 Corinthians, where the Apostle Paul uses irony and “boasting” to defend his ministry against critics. Paul’s rhetorical style in this chapter is self-consciously boastful, but meant to highlight the absurdity of his critics’ claims and to defend his apostolic authority.

Smith then adopted a similar rhetorical approach, stating:

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet…”

Interpretations and Reactions
Critics have cited this statement as evidence of arrogance or even blasphemy, suggesting Smith claimed to be greater than Jesus.

Defenders and some historians argue that Smith was using rhetorical irony, echoing Paul’s style, and that he was not literally claiming superiority over Jesus. Instead, he was emphasizing the loyalty of his followers in contrast to the biblical accounts of Jesus’ disciples fleeing at his arrest.

The context of persecution and Smith’s imminent danger (he would be killed within weeks) also shaped the tone of the sermon. He was defending his leadership and the unity of his church in the face of severe opposition.
Perplexity A.I.

I suppose you can take it how you want to.

Regards,
MG

So it's not blasphemous to diss on Jesus in a mocking boast? That Mormonism, it's the gift that just keeps on giving.

[MG 2.0]

MG, thanks for giving credit to the A.I. that supplies your apologetic responses.

You are welcome. A while back I mentioned that when I use an A.I. to retrieve information (saves a LOT of time!) I always read through and determine whether I'm in agreement with the content. In other words, "I approve this message".

All in all, Perplexity A.I. does a wonderful job at retrieving and compiling information.

Regards,
MG