What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Public forum to discuss questions about Mormon history and doctrine.
User avatar
SamBee
Posts: 5373
Joined: 14 Mar 2010, 04:55

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by SamBee » 09 Apr 2019, 01:02

nibbler wrote:
08 Apr 2019, 16:28
Was the concept of Eve consciously kicking off the Fall unique to the BoM?
In many Christian sects she gets the blame - hence women's birth pains, a form of punishment, allegedly.

However, the idea that they did it consciously is very unusual.

According to a rabbinical commentary, the first real sin was not taking the fruit but lying about it after, because then they knew good from evil. The first truly evil act in the Bible though is when Cain murders.
DASH1730 "An Area Authority...[was] asked...who...would go to the Telestial kingdom. His answer: "murderers, adulterers and a lot of surprised Mormons!"'
1ST PRES 1978 "[LDS] believe...there is truth in many religions and philosophies...good and great religious leaders... have raised the spiritual, moral, and ethical awareness of their people. When we speak of The [LDS] as the only true church...it is...authorized to administer the ordinances...by Jesus Christ... we do not mean... it is the only teacher of truth."

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7227
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by SilentDawning » 09 Apr 2019, 06:09

rrosskopf wrote:
08 Apr 2019, 16:14
SilentDawning wrote:
07 Apr 2019, 09:27

I have a really hard time believing it contains "the fulness of the gospel" because a lot of ordinances mentioned only in D&C are missing, such as temple marriage.
The fulness of the gospel, as understood by the Nephites, is contained in the Book of Mormon. "Fulness" is not to be understood as a detailed list of all doctrines and ordinances, but rather as containing the four or five major concepts; if the gospel were missing any one of these, it would not lead to salvation.


I think you could argue this successfully. If you consider salvation life with God, then yes, the first four principles and enduring to the end would get you there....but then we have the highest level of salvation which is eternal progression. And you need to have entered into the celestial marriage covenant to achieve this. Therefore, the term "fullness" in a book written for our day doesn't cut it for me. I think to say it contains principles that lead to salvation would be clearer, but fullness, in my view is a misnomer.
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

User avatar
rrosskopf
Posts: 46
Joined: 07 Apr 2019, 06:52

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by rrosskopf » 09 Apr 2019, 06:50

SilentDawning wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 06:09
If you consider salvation life with God, then yes, the first four principles and enduring to the end would get you there....but then we have the highest level of salvation which is eternal progression. And you need to have entered into the celestial marriage covenant to achieve this.
There will be single people in the Celestial kingdom. They will have received salvation by following the principles taught in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I see no indication that the Nephites, nor the Jews, had much if any understanding of Celestial Marriage. Jesus may have taught it, but only privately to a select few. No one has ever included this doctrine as part of the "good news", as far as I am aware. The "good news" is that we can repent and be forgiven and that we can become "saints", sanctified by the spirit of the Holy Ghost and sealed to rise with the saints at the last day.

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7227
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by SilentDawning » 09 Apr 2019, 06:58

rrosskopf wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 06:50
SilentDawning wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 06:09
If you consider salvation life with God, then yes, the first four principles and enduring to the end would get you there....but then we have the highest level of salvation which is eternal progression. And you need to have entered into the celestial marriage covenant to achieve this.
There will be single people in the Celestial kingdom. They will have received salvation by following the principles taught in the gospel of Jesus Christ. I see no indication that the Nephites, nor the Jews, had much if any understanding of Celestial Marriage. Jesus may have taught it, but only privately to a select few. No one has ever included this doctrine as part of the "good news", as far as I am aware. The "good news" is that we can repent and be forgiven and that we can become "saints", sanctified by the spirit of the Holy Ghost and sealed to rise with the saints at the last day.
True, but to call a lesser position in the salvation levels described in the BoM a "fullness" is misleading....and being alone, without a partner, and unable to progress eternally has been considered uncomfortable for many...so I guess I still object to the term "fullness" used when describing the BoM. I will say, the BoM is a lot simpler than the salvation described in the D&C, which tends to create a lot of 'God will have to work that out' statements from people when they talk about exceptions and odd situations...particularly related to celestial marriage.
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

Roy
Posts: 5712
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by Roy » 09 Apr 2019, 08:20

Perhaps "fullness" is hyperbole. Like saying the Most Awesome Gospel Ever!
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16583
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by Curt Sunshine » 09 Apr 2019, 10:43

Fullness is a subjective term, except in cases where exact measurements can be made. It always will be. I am fine with using it as a general statement about a few core pillars, for example - but those core pillars are taught in the Bibke, as well.

I would agree that the core concepts we generally associate with the Gospel (faith in Jesus as the Savior and Redeemer, repentance, baptism, the Holy Guost, enduring to the end) are taught more clearly in the BofM than in the Bible, but exaltation isn't taught clearly, if at all, in the BofM. It is taught in the Bible - as one of the core themes, actually.

I believe acceptance of the BofM is to enable people to read the Bible with new eyes, so to speak, and see things that the Bible teaches that have not been recognized in traditional Christian theology - particularly those that deal with the individuality of God, the Father, and God, the Son, and our relationship to them. Those things are taught more directly in the Bible than in the BofM - and the BofM says explicitly one of its core purposes is to lead people to beleive the Bible (as opposed to what is taught about the Bible).

"Another" testimony of Jesus Christ presupposes an existing testimony of Jesus Christ - and what I just described is the way Joseph Smith and the early saints generally used the BofM. It was the cornerstone of their religion and testimonies of The Reatoration, but it wasn't the cornerstone of their Gospel study. That was the Bible.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 6672
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by DarkJedi » 09 Apr 2019, 11:13

Curt Sunshine wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 10:43
Fullness is a subjective term, except in cases where exact measurements can be made. It always will be. I am fine with using it as a general statement about a few core pillars, for example - but those core pillars are taught in the Bibke, as well.

I would agree that the core concepts we generally associate with the Gospel (faith in Jesus as the Savior and Redeemer, repentance, baptism, the Holy Guost, enduring to the end) are taught more clearly in the BofM than in the Bible, but exaltation isn't taught clearly, if at all, in the BofM. It is taught in the Bible - as one of the core themes, actually.

I believe acceptance of the BofM is to enable people to read the Bible with new eyes, so to speak, and see things that the Bible teaches that have not been recognized in traditional Christian theology - particularly those that deal with the individuality of God, the Father, and God, the Son, and our relationship to them. Those things are taught more directly in the Bible than in the BofM - and the BofM says explicitly one of its core purposes is to lead people to beleive the Bible (as opposed to what is taught about the Bible).

"Another" testimony of Jesus Christ presupposes an existing testimony of Jesus Christ - and what I just described is the way Joseph Smith and the early saints generally used the BofM. It was the cornerstone of their religion and testimonies of The Reatoration, but it wasn't the cornerstone of their Gospel study. That was the Bible.
I have a similar view of fullness. I believe in the temple both the BoM and the Bible are described as containing the fullness of the gospel. Since my own view is that the gospel is very simple (reiterated again by an apostle just a couple days ago) it seems plausible that both books - and others - may contain the fullness of the gospel.

I also particularly like your comment about "another testimony" as presupposing there is at least one more. I am preparing a talk for later this month which includes part of my own story and really coming to know the Savior through the New Testament. There's nothing wrong with the BoM as a witness of Christ - I do believe it can and does bring people closer to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. But I also believe that instead of reading mostly what other people (the BoM writers) said about a Messiah they never knew, we can gain a much better knowledge of Him by reading the "eyewitness" accounts of what he said and did (quotation marks purposeful). Much of the BoM is akin to what any person living today could say about Christ, not knowing Him personally. Frankly if I had not read the four gospels as part of rebuilding my faith I may still not be an active member today. If you don't mind Curt, I'd like to use your thought (I'll paraphrase/use my own words and will likely expand the idea).

As a side note, there are very few recorded instances of Joseph quoting from the BoM. It was much harder in those days because it was not divided chapter and verse the way we know it. Joseph did however frequently teach concepts from the BoM. At the same time it is clear he was intimately familiar with the Bible and much of his theology is directly Biblical.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

Arrakeen
Posts: 56
Joined: 25 Aug 2018, 18:49

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by Arrakeen » 09 Apr 2019, 13:28

DarkJedi wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 11:13
Frankly if I had not read the four gospels as part of rebuilding my faith I may still not be an active member today.
This is where I'm at currrently in my own journey. I'm focusing on studying the New Testament for now, and it's amazing how much better things fall into place with a focus on the simple, fundamental teachings of Christ.
The fundamental principles of our religion is the testimony of the apostles and prophets concerning Jesus Christ, “that he died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended up into heaven;” and all other things are only appendages to these, which pertain to our religion.
--Joseph Smith
I think the "fullness of the gospel" is really just the core message- the message of God's love shown through Jesus' life, ministry, death and resurrection.

As for other teachings in the Book of Mormon, I think there is also a significant message about social issues like wealth inequality.

Roy
Posts: 5712
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by Roy » 11 Apr 2019, 11:39

Arrakeen wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 13:28
I think the "fullness of the gospel" is really just the core message- the message of God's love shown through Jesus' life, ministry, death and resurrection.
Amen!
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
rrosskopf
Posts: 46
Joined: 07 Apr 2019, 06:52

Re: What does the Book of Mormon actually teach?

Post by rrosskopf » 12 Apr 2019, 03:38

May I point out that technically, "fullness" just means satisfyingly full? When one is full, they are no longer hungry, but they could still eat more.

Post Reply