The Book of Mormon

Before I start, no, I am not a Mormon, even though i'm sure some will like to claim I am after this.

Has anyone read the BoM? What's your opinion on it?

My personal opinion is this, the BoM is simply a confirmation/companion of the Bible.

You don't have to be a Mormon to read and believe in it either, if anything, the Mormon church has done nothing but give the book a bad name.

I'll gladly any questions and criticisms of the book, and happily answer questions as to why the MoMo church should discontinue claim of it.

 

If my understanding of the mythology behind 'The Book of Mormon' is correct, then it is simply silly. The ideas behind the Book of Mormon doesn't even mesh with Christian theology as presented. It was probably, in all honesty, the work of a charismatic cult leader to affirm veracity of the claims of prophethood. It is arguably a Gnostic branch religion and contains a lot of heretical beliefs when compared to the main religious texts of Christianity.

 

Actually there's nothing contradictory doctrine wise, so I don't know how you can make that claim.

I'm talking about the book, the Mormon CHURCH is entirely separate because of D&C. The only weird things you'll find are in D&C, the D&C and BoM are 100% separate. The BoM was only dictated by Joseph Smith, not written, D&C however was written by Joe.

 

coming from a LDS mother i can tell you the book of mormon has racist principals in it. I personalty think the book is great, just like the bible. i do not take it to a religious level. i read it as if i were reading fables.

 

Well i'm asking for specifics. There are no racist principals in the BoM. In the Mormon church yes, there used to be racist practices, but that is not supported anywhere in the entire BoM.

Everything the Mormon church practices is derived from the D&C, not from the BoM, that's why i'm talking about the BoM and not the church.

 

i disagrre here is a bit out of second nephi

 

These guys come to my door once a week, always friendly but I don't buy why they are selling me.

 

I know you're Googling "racism in the BoM," but you're reading into it far too much and pretending something is there that is not.

Their skin turning dark was to signify who was not a believer, so the Nephites would not intermingle with them, as they were cursed. Their skin color doesn't denote race either, as the Lamanites and Nephites were related. The change in skin color was to denote who was cursed and to not associate with them. It has nothing to do with "race."

This is the same argument people try to use when pretending Mosaic law is the equivalent to Sharia law, neither applied to other peoples, only to one specific people.

If the verse really were racist, you would be finding a litany of other passages related to who can be a priest, a teacher, who can participate in communion, and race would be a factor, but it isn't, because 2 Nephi is very specific with who the curse applies to, and why it does.

The Mormon church doesn't follow what their own recruitment tool teaches.

 

okay spyder, you are starting to insult me. Im not googling anything. i have lived with my mormon mother for 19 years of my life. went to church every sunday. dont tell me what i do and do not know. Your attitude is not havesting a civil conversation. So if you would like to continou this conversation I would highly reconment you dont treat me like im a idiot.

 

Goodluck Neo, that's how he attempts to debate. He has a incredibly condescending attitude, will disregard information, and simply say "you're misinterpreting it."

Anyway, I don't have much of an opinion. It's in the same category of how I old the Koran/Quran, the Bible, and other religious works. I don't believe in the actual teachings/practices, but good values (and some shitty ones) can be found within said works.

 

me aswell tmoe there good fables. accept the old testament and the second nephi of the BoM very horrid things.. (second nephi only is bad because of racism)

 

I'll ask you the same thing I asked him, if the 2 Nephi passage implies racism, why is there not a single restriction on race regarding who can be priests, teachers, partake of communion? The 2 Nephi passage doesn't imply racism, it was a curse to distinguish between two peoples, what color their skin changed to is about as relevant as to why one was in the North and one was in the South.

What bearing does the Mormon church have on a book in which they don't follow?

The Mormon church follows D&C, not the Book of Mormon, you of all people should recognize this.

I'll say this again btw, if the passage you quote implies racism, race/skin color would be a determining factor in communion, who could be teachers and priests, or anything else in the BoM that involves "authority," the problem with the argument is that it doesn't make that assertion anywhere.

And no offense, but if you feel insulted simply because you're wrong, that's your problem. Your job is to prove your position, misinterpreting/reading into passages that are blatantly wrong, and me pointing it out, shouldn't be taken as an insult.

There's no reason to be defensive simply because I ask a basic question. I'll restate it.

If the 2 Nephi passage implies racism, where is racism found in relation to priests, teachers and partaking of communion? If race is at all a factor, it would be found in a litany of other passages. Factoring these things in concludes that the actual skin tone has literally nothing to do with race itself, but rather distinguishing two peoples.

E: To further my point, and because you attended the Mormon church with your mother who may or may not have brought this topic up with you (not sure how much you know of church history). The Mormon church years back didn't allow blacks to hold the priesthood or be married in their temples. Now, even though I 100% disagree with those two aspects of their church entirely, lets pretend for a moment that I do. If 2 Nephi were to actually address race (which the Lamanites weren't "black" anyways), where does it say in the BoM that blacks could not A) Hold the priesthood or B) Be married in Mormon temples because they are "cursed" being "black"?

It actually doesn't say anything of the sort anywhere in the entire BoM, because the 2 Nephi passage has nothing to do with race, it addresses who is cursed and for what reasons. The Mormon church has tried to skirt around the issue by saying "oh well the skin color wasn't the curse!" lets admit to their wrongfulness, the skin color was literally the mark mark to distinguish between the two peoples, who was cursed, and who wasn't. However, black skin has nothing to do with race, and like i've said many times now, if it did, there would be a myriad of other examples of it in relation to priests, teachers, baptism and communion.

 

I asked something quite simple. If the passage is indeed racist and nothing but racial, it would permeate the BoM in anything that involves salvation and authority, but it doesn't.

If you're going to claim I am wrong, back it up with something. I gave a very clear example of how you are wrong in you interpretation. It's black and white, no pun intended.

 

Zipped

 

I totally disagree with your analysis. The point of the verse is to explain that these people were marked by blackness in skin in order to identify that they are the cursed ones (or have hardened their hearts and whatnot). Now, obviously in order for this marking to be effective, it has to be evident that these skin-darkened people are the cursed ones. So the fact that blackened skin is chosen as the marking indicates that blackened skin did not exist beforehand - otherwise, how could you distinguish between blackened skin cursed people and regular blackened skin people? Thus, black people came into existence solely because they were people who had hardened hearts against God and were cursed. This entails that every single black person is a descendant of a cursed group of people and that is the only reason why they are black. That's incredibly racist and obviously one of the dumbest ideas conceivable.

Blackness is typically an indicator of race, I don't know how you think you can claim it's not. In fact, colour is often the tool we use to quickly identify someone's race.

 

Yet skin color doesn't denote racial ties in the passage you'd like to pretend is racial, which lineage wise, would be impossible, seeing as they're the from the same peoples. Your own argument supports my own when you make note of the fact that the skin color has more to do with distinguishing between believers/non-believers within this peoples, it didn't apply to anyone outside. Much like how Mosaic law applied to Israel, not to others.

Nowhere in the entire BoM does it set the precedent that skin color/race is a factor in who can be a priest, teacher, be baptized, baptize, the list goes on and on, nowhere is that a factor, because the single passage you pretend is "racist," is specific with who and WHY it is applied.

I'll propose the same challenge I did to the above user who liked to pretend it's racist. If you can find me a single racial requirement in the entire BoM that involves anything having to do with salvation, priests, teachers, baptism, you can then claim the verse is purely racial.

In the end, you won't take me up on that challenge, because you're grasping for straws.


Lastly

I'd like for you to attempt to substantiate this claim, because i've actually never seen this argument used. Probably because it's an impossible case to make.

Do you know in which region of the planet this took place? I'll give you a hint, it's nowhere near Africa, not even on the same side of the globe.

Fair enough that you lump it together with Santa, but to address one of the things you brought up.

The Mormon church not allowing blacks to hold the priesthood, or whatever other church offices there were or practices they couldn't partake in, it's not found anywhere in the BoM.

This is one of the things that people will try to use to claim "the BoM is racist!" along with the 2 Nephi passage, which is then why I ask people to find where exactly in the entire BoM does it impose racial qualifications for who can be X, Y and Z etc. Thing is, it doesn't say any such thing in the entire BoM.

This is why the Mormon church has for the most part been a negative entity. Sure, i'd give them credit for the fact that they use the BoM as a recruitment tool, but it's actually the D&C that makes people leave the church.

The Mormon church is actually one of the fastest growing, but they also lose the most members of all denominations. Why? Because the BoM does a very good job of showing truth, and unfortunately, the D&C (written by Joe) is what turns people away.

Virtually all Mormon church practices are not found in the BoM, anywhere, they're only found in the D&C, which isn't the BoM, by a long shot.

That's the big problem with the Mormon church, if they'd denounce Joe and the D&C, they'd retain more members than they lose.

 

I mean this thread has been around and it isn't even delved into how Jesus came and preached to the natives of the Americas yet. But when the original explorers of America came across the Native Americans none of them were Jesus Worshiping Christians, but were clearly loosely associated shamanistic tribes.

 

So if black people existed beforehand, how are you supposed to distinguish between a cursed person and a regular black person?

 

Did you read a word I said?

1. The time-table for this is set ~2,000 years ago, can you tell me exactly where native "blacks" existed in the supposed setting of BoM lands? What "black person" (black is not a race) are you going to find in N. America?

2. The cursing had specifically to do with the Lamanites/Nephites, not other peoples.

Also, you ignored by question. If this truly has to do with race, where in the BoM do you find race to be a factor in salvation, priests, teachers, who can baptize, who can partake of communion, etc.

I've yet to find anyone that disagrees with that point... the Nephites were the followers, and they were destroyed. Hence, the plates were hidden/lost until they would come about again.

Right, there are many contradictions between what Joe wrote in his D&C, and what he dictated to his scribes during the translation of the BoM.

You won't find Mormon doctrine in the BoM.

People need to realize there's a clear distinction between the BoM itself, and what the church teaches. Nowhere will you find the weird Mormon church beliefs in the BoM, they're entirely separate.

 

That is totally not true. Mormons argue there are numerous archaeological evidences that prove that the natives worshiped Jesus. I mean even if they don't agree with that then it is still heretical to mainstream Bible theological study that Jesus came to the Americas.