Necessity of the BoM

[Anonymous]

Just a thought. If JS left the BoM out of the restored church, and our theology consisted only of the D&C revelations, the PoGP, JS’s sermons on theology, and temple ordinances: how different would the church be?

[Anonymous]

That’s an interesting thought…

I would submit that because we don’t have the sealed portion of the BoM, the records of the lost tribes, and no-telling what other records that have not yet come forth….that we’re pretty backward allready.

Would the PoGP help generate a following? There’s not a lot there compared with the Bible or BoM. Also, there is a lot of controversy since we don’t seem to have the papyri that the scriptures came from. (we don’t have the BoM plates either but the papyri still seems to be a real problem for some folks)

Joseph’s sermons on theology may indeed have generated a limited following…many people were converted by him without ever reading the BoM. (in fact, we probably over-estimate the literacy rate of the early converts and falsely assume that they all read the BoM)

Having said all that….the priesthood was restored beginning with Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey and there didn’t need to be a BoM around to accomplish that. The priesthood would still be alive and functioning with/without a “church”. Issac, Jacob, etc…all had the priesthood and did just fine and there was, of course, no “church”.

I don’t imagine the results of the restoration, whether it be the mainstream church (if there even would be one) or any of the other groups, would be anything that we would recognize. However, I’m quite sure the Lord could manage to bring His work forth without one of the current works….just as He is doing so without the others.

[Anonymous]

Had we not had the BofM, I don’t believe the D&C would have happened the way it did. We would look very different….. I am not even sure we would be in existence at all.

[Anonymous]

It seems to me that many people are drawn by the “work of God” or some miracle to start their faith in God, similar to how Christ developed a following when he started his work of miracles. There were many preachers of Joseph’s day teaching new doctrines or claiming revelations (to some degree), but only had their word or their teaching.

The Book of Mormon was a miracle in its origin and content, that you could read and ask if it was of God or not, and because it cannot be proven it is a forgery or not…it is a miracle to be tested by faith only. It established Joseph as a prophet, bringing a set of scriptures that was prepared by God about an ancient people, not about New Englanders, and it had the converting power for those who read it. The D&C was direct revelations after the followers were already converted, and then added to the new movement but does not have the converting power of establishing scripture like the Book of Mormon does. PoGP, D&C, and JS Translation of the Bible are all appendages after one accepts the BoM.

Just think today of how the missionaries use the Book of Mormon to convert, they don’t go out passing out copies of the Ensign and its teachigns to convert people.

The book of mormon clearly separated Joseph Smith from other preachers and other religions, even those that also had claims of personal revelations or tracts of their own new teachings.

The church could not have grown to what it is today without it. I don’t believe the church would have survived Joseph Smith without the Book of Mormon.

[Anonymous]

In regards to the content, rather than the discovery/miracle of a new book, how would the church differ? Does Mormon theology have anything to do with the content in the BoM?

[Anonymous]

spacious maze wrote:

In regards to the content, rather than the discovery/miracle of a new book, how would the church differ? Does Mormon theology have anything to do with the content in the BoM?

Very interesting question!

I value highly the content of the BoM. I actually think that it is a great pointer towards higher truths. But, it does not seem that we follow the teachings of the BoM all that much. Ironically, this is prophesied of in scripture and the saints were warned about it in the D&C. We also don’t apply things to ourselves as fully as we should. Well, I guess I believe the Book of Mormon is our story-the story of us. Regardless of whether the church uses the theology and gospel outlined in the BoM the book is the “keystone” of our religion.

D&C 84:54 And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—

55 Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

56 And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

57 And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—

58 That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.

I believe it was President Bensen who said that the church is still under condemnation. I believe that to be an accurate statement. It also amazes me that this revelation was given in 1832!

[Anonymous]

I have a very different outlook on this.

Content-wise, not much of our unique doctrine and theology come from the BofM; most of it is found in the Bible.

One of the primary reasons for the BofM, according to the book itself, is to testify of the Bible – and to open our minds and hearts to the possiblity of communing directly with God. I think the BofM acts as a catalyst to force someone to humble him/herself to approach God with a sincere heart and ask for personal revelation. Those who receive a “witness” begin a journey of openness to the Spirit, which is symbolized (and sometimes actualized) in the Gift of the Holy Ghost. That process (companionship) opens the mind to read the Bible with new eyes, through which the truly unique doctrines of the Restoration are suddenly understood.

It also opens a conduit to seek personal revelation in personal areas – at the individual level, which, when you think about it, is what keeps many people who struggle with their faith in the Church. They received a personal witness of some strength when they opened their heart to the possibility of communing directly with God, and the BofM played a huge role in that for many.

[Anonymous]

It seems like Brigham Young said that he would rather have living oracles lead than written scriptures. From that point of view, it does seem that the BoM doesn’t offer much more than the Bible, so it does seem that the church wouldn’t be all that different. Some of the things we claim, such as revelation, and angelic visits, would have still happened. I suspect the D&C would be much larger.

[Anonymous]

I agree with everyone! 🙄

I think the church would have been just another of the dozens that were started in that time period which claimed to be the “restored’ church. In fact, there was a whole movement called the restorationist movement, Sidney Rigdon and the Whitmers being some-time followers at the time they came into contact with JS. Without the BoM, the church would have withered and died, imo.

Also, the organization and theological practice of the Nephites is totally irrelevant to anything we do now. No temple worship, no animal sacrifice before Christ’s birth, one sacrament after his resurrection, ambiguous priesthood practices and authority, no word of wisdom, no garments, no polygamy, etc. In fact, if you didn’t know better, you could assume the BoM has no practical application to the functioning of the church. The OT, on the other hand, has it all, in various forms.

So, I gotta go with Ray. The BoM is simply a witness: to JS, to the Bible, to Christ’s teachings (at some level). It’s also a powerful witness to the uniqueness (perceived or real) of mormons.

[Anonymous]

I think there was benefit in the Book of Mormon establishing the doctrines in God’s chosen Israel people to be gathered again and be restored by Gentiles (not Gentiles becoming the chosen people but rooting things back to the Bible teachings of the House of Israel), Christ’s roles in the plan prior to His earthly ministry, his visitation to the Lost Sheep as another testament of his ministry, and his establishment of a church with teachings such as priesthood and baptism (including no infant baptisms).

Many of these basics are similar to the Bible teachings, but many religions in Joseph Smith’s day were departing from these, and the Book of Mormon established the restored church doctrine back to its purity, not having it become a new progressive church to replace the prior church, but the same church in latter days. The Book of Mormon was key to establishing that doctrinal foundation, then the new revelations and ongoing prophets built upon this.

I still believe the Book of Mormon was critical to the church and it could not have been successful without it.

Joseph said it is “the keystone of our religion”.

[Author]

Posts