Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[Valo]

British Isles were colonized by remnant of the Israelites, particularly the tribe of Dan but also other Israelites.

The Book of Mormon, for the most part, recounts a history of these people.

https://x.com/Thekeksociety/status/1837 ... IMakQ&s=19

I am sorry - but can you clarify whether the two sentences above represent your own view of the history of the ancient population of the British Isles?

Or is it it just the view of the 'Dr Kek' to whose X post you link?

Don't worry about me personally. The information is either true or false irrespective of the person bringing the Idea forward.

Ad hominems are fallacious.

[drumdude]

I am sorry - but can you clarify whether the two sentences above represent your own view of the history of the ancient population of the British Isles?

Or is it it just the view of the 'Dr Kek' to whose X post you link?

Don't worry about me personally. The information is either true or false irrespective of the person bringing the Idea forward.

Ad hominems are fallacious.

I’d trust anyone with the name Dr Kek. They probably believe we didn’t land on the moon, 9/11 was an inside job, and the vaccines are for mind control. The farther away from the lame stream media narrative they are the more true it must be (without any evidence.)

[MG 2.0]

John 10:22-42

22 It was now winter, and Jesus was in Jerusalem at the time of Hanukkah, the Festival of Dedication. 23 He was in the Temple, walking through the section known as Solomon’s Colonnade. 24 The people surrounded him and asked, “How long are you going to keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus replied, “I have already told you, and you don’t believe me. The proof is the work I do in my Father’s name. 26 But you don’t believe me because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them away from me, 29 for my Father has given them to me, and he is more powerful than anyone else.[a] No one can snatch them from the Father’s hand. 30 The Father and I are one.”

31 Once again the people picked up stones to kill him. 32 Jesus said, “At my Father’s direction I have done many good works. For which one are you going to stone me?”

33 They replied, “We’re stoning you not for any good work, but for blasphemy! You, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus replied, “It is written in your own Scriptures that God said to certain leaders of the people, ‘I say, you are gods!’[c] 35 And you know that the Scriptures cannot be altered. So if those people who received God’s message were called ‘gods,’ 36 why do you call it blasphemy when I say, ‘I am the Son of God’? After all, the Father set me apart and sent me into the world. 37 Don’t believe me unless I carry out my Father’s work. 38 But if I do his work, believe in the evidence of the miraculous works I have done, even if you don’t believe me. Then you will know and understand that the Father is in me, and I am in the Father.”

39 Once again they tried to arrest him, but he got away and left them. 40 He went beyond the Jordan River near the place where John was first baptizing and stayed there a while. 41 And many followed him. “John didn’t perform miraculous signs,” they remarked to one another, “but everything he said about this man has come true.” 42 And many who were there believed in Jesus.



Regards,
MG

None of the sayings in John actually go back to the historical Jesus. If you're looking for Jesus' teachings, they're only in the synoptics, and only in a small portion of the sayings attributed to him.

Is it true that there are some New Testament scholars that might disagree? Such as:

N.T. Wright
Craig S. Keener
Raymond E. Brown
D.A. Carson
Marianne Meye Thompson
Richard Bauckham

The thing is, I don’t know you from Adam.

John 10:22-42 may very well be attributable to the teachings of Jesus and close associates of his at the time.

If so, it appears as though, as I said, Jesus was unique and different for all of the other folks at that time, before and after, that had some common practices and characteristics which might cause some people to lump them all together as one.

I, for one, don’t think it coincidental that the name of Jesus Christ has been ‘mainline’ in Christian churches throughout the ages.

It appears as though Jesus may very well have been no ordinary man.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

None of the sayings in John actually go back to the historical Jesus. If you're looking for Jesus' teachings, they're only in the synoptics, and only in a small portion of the sayings attributed to him.

Is it true that there are some New Testament scholars that might disagree? Such as:

N.T. Wright
Craig S. Keener
Raymond E. Brown
D.A. Carson
Marianne Meye Thompson
Richard Bauckham

The thing is, I don’t know you from Adam.

John 10:22-42 may very well be attributable to the teachings of Jesus and close associates of his at the time.

If so, it appears as though, as I said, Jesus was unique and different for all of the other folks at that time, before and after, that had some common practices and characteristics which might cause some people to lump them all together as one.

I, for one, don’t think it coincidental that the name of Jesus Christ has been ‘mainline’ in Christian churches throughout the ages.

It appears as though Jesus may very well have been no ordinary man.

Regards,
MG

No one is saying Jesus wasn't unique. No one is saying that it's coincidental that Jesus is associated with mainline Christianity. None of us is an ordinary man (or woman). We are all snowflakes.

Nevertheless, Jesus wasn't the only prophet to claim a relationship with God. And there's no evidence that Jesus was the first to introduce personal prayer.

[Morley]

Jesus came to earth and showed us how to pray to the Father. Before Jesus the ‘prayers’ were of a liturgical nature without a direct link to God by the regular Joe and Jane.

Please show where you get this.

[huckelberry]

Jesus came to earth and showed us how to pray to the Father. Before Jesus the ‘prayers’ were of a liturgical nature without a direct link to God by the regular Joe and Jane.

Please show where you get this.

psalm 51 Have mercy on me O God, according to thy steadfast love
according to thy abundance mercy,
blot out my transgressions.
......
Many Psalms address God directly. Some are clearly liturgical others like this are quite personal though they could get used both ways. Either way they could be instructional for individuals.

I do not think there is reason to search for something Jesus did that nobody else did. It is possible to see the total of what he did as unique.

[MG 2.0]

Jesus came to earth and showed us how to pray to the Father. Before Jesus the ‘prayers’ were of a liturgical nature without a direct link to God by the regular Joe and Jane.

Please show where you get this.

Inquiry: Jesus came to earth and showed us how to pray to the Father. Before Jesus the ‘prayers’ were of a liturgical nature without a direct link to God by the regular Joe and Jane.

Answer:

Yes, that's a good way to summarize the shift in prayer practices that occurred with the coming of Jesus. Prior to Jesus, prayer in Judaism was primarily a communal and liturgical activity, centered around the Temple in Jerusalem and led by priests. While individuals could pray on their own, the focus was often on following prescribed formulas and rituals, rather than on a personal relationship with God.

With the coming of Jesus, however, prayer took on a more personal and intimate character. Jesus taught his followers to pray directly to God as their Father, and to approach him with honesty, humility, and faith. He also modeled a life of prayer, often retreating to pray alone and teaching his disciples the Lord's Prayer as a guide for their own prayer lives.

This shift in prayer practices was significant, as it emphasized the accessibility of God to all people, regardless of their social or religious status. It also paved the way for the development of personal prayer and meditation practices that continue to be an important part of many Christian traditions today.

Way off?

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

So Adam, Noah, Moses, Isaiah -- None of these guys knew how to pray directly to God?

[Everybody Wang Chung]

So Adam, Noah, Moses, Isaiah -- None of these guys knew how to pray directly to God?

And according to MG 2.0, Nephi, Lehi and most people in the Book of Mormon didn't know how to pray either.

[MG 2.0]

So Adam, Noah, Moses, Isaiah -- None of these guys knew how to pray directly to God?

I think the point is that Jesus taught his disciples to pray to the Father and that it was something everyone was commanded/encouraged to do.

While the prayers of individuals like Adam, Noah, Moses, and Isaiah may have had some similarities to liturgical prayers, they were not exclusively liturgical in nature.

At the same time, it's important to recognize that the concept of prayer in the Hebrew scriptures is often closely tied to sacrifice and offering, which were central to Jewish religious practice. In this sense, some of the prayers of individuals like Moses and Isaiah may have had a more liturgical flavor, as they were offered in the context of formal religious ceremonies or rituals.
-PI A.I.

There was some kind of qualitative difference in prayer before and after Christ. The proof seems to be that Jesus taught his disciples how to pray and then commanded them (all disciples, including those in our day) to make it a constant and daily practice.

Personally, I think that when we move away from calling upon our Father in Heaven we are more likely to stray off of the covenant path. The Book of Mormon teaches this rather explicitly.

Regards,
MG