VeggieBoards banner
21 - 24 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,902 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fromper View Post

I'm still confused. American language 400 years AD? Since that's 1000 years before Europeans came to the Americas, I'm assuming you're talking about one of the native American tribal languages, but there were many of those.

Sorry to ask such silly questions, but I really don't know much about Mormon beliefs.
My understanding is, and the Mormons can correct this, is that according to the Mormon religion, the book of Mormon was revealed to Joseph Smith by angels who led him to ancient golden plates with copies of the text which he translated with some divine stones (I've also heard glasses, so perhaps the Mormons here can clarify). This happened around 1830, but the golden plates, according to Mormonism, were written in the Americas in ancient times. (I'm not clear on this.)

There are no copies of the originals in the story. I do not know if the original translation by Joseph Smith is still around.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism

http://www.mormon.org/ (I looked here, but was not easily able to confirm my understanding of the story.)

Macylee-Were the golden plates with the text that were translated written by the Native American population founded by Lehi? Also, what about the text you are arguing about with your father-in-law? That is not part of the book of Mormon, but it was revealed? Was it revealed from the same language as the book of Mormon, according to Mormonism, or was it a direct revelation from God? I, too, find the story of LDS to be very fascinating.

I agree, the texts are a bit confusing and contradictory. I would say that as long as you don't forbid anyone else from eating meat, you should be safe if you are trying to live within the texts. The one verse I copied above clearly says to me that God will be happier if you do abstain, even though you don't have to.

Of course this sort of issue comes up within religion a lot, and in the end we all have to make our own decision and be confident in that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thalia View Post

My understanding is, and the Mormons can correct this, is that according to the Mormon religion, the book of Mormon was revealed to Joseph Smith by angels who led him to ancient golden plates with copies of the text which he translated with some divine stones (I've also heard glasses, so perhaps the Mormons here can clarify). This happened around 1830, but the golden plates, according to Mormonism, were written in the Americas in ancient times. (I'm not clear on this.)

There are no copies of the originals in the story. I do not know if the original translation by Joseph Smith is still around.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism

http://www.mormon.org/ (I looked here, but was not easily able to confirm my understanding of the story.)

Macylee-Were the golden plates with the text that were translated written by the Native American population founded by Lehi? Also, what about the text you are arguing about with your father-in-law? That is not part of the book of Mormon, but it was revealed? Was it revealed from the same language as the book of Mormon, according to Mormonism, or was it a direct revelation from God? I, too, find the story of LDS to be very fascinating.

I agree, the texts are a bit confusing and contradictory. I would say that as long as you don't forbid anyone else from eating meat, you should be safe if you are trying to live within the texts. The one verse I copied above clearly says to me that God will be happier if you do abstain, even though you don't have to.

Of course this sort of issue comes up within religion a lot, and in the end we all have to make our own decision and be confident in that.
Okay lots to write I think :)

The golden plates WERE the translated text. For those who don't know, the Book of Mormon (BOM) is another testament of Christ, so we use the Bible too of course. The BOM started out in Jerusalem with the prophet Lehi. The Lord told him to take his family into the wilderness because people sought to kill him. Then after a while Nephi (Lehi's son) was commanded by the Lord to build a boat and the Lord would show them where to go. They ended up in the Americas (based on what other people have studied it is safe to say primarily South America). After they had been here for a time, the rebellious sons (Laman and Lemuel) fathered their own children which created a civilization. Nephi also had children which did the same thing. The Lamanites and Nephites fought and had several wars. There were prophets who preached repentance and prophesied of Christ's coming. Then you get to the part where Christ was born and the people in the America's saw some of the same signs as those in Bethlehem. After Christ died and was resurrected, when he finished his business with his apostles and whomever else, he visited the people in the Americas. And so the BOM is another testament of Christ telling about other prophets and of Christ.

The other text came from the Doctrine and Covenants which (I had mentioned earlier) is a compilation of modern day revelations given to the Lord's modern day prophets. We believe the Lord still speaks to prophets today just as he did before and so we believe it is the Lord who runs our church.

My personal opinion about the texts sounding contradictory is just that the WoW came later and its purpose was to clarify (at least the meat part because the other stuff hadn't really been mentioned yet). I think it was meant to say "yes you can have meat and use the animals, however I would like you to only have it when you absolutely need it."
 
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
Top