What doctrines of the Mormon Church are not found in the Bible?...?

Question

Anna - (sorry about above) Matthew 22:30 is being taken out of context. Jesus was teaching about the resurrection of the dead to a sadducces "who say there is no resurrection" vs 23 not teaching the concept of eternal marriage. He only specifies that after the resurrection there is no marriage... he never says the woman wont be married to any of them.
Christ however did teach about the eternal nature of marriage - Mark 10: 7-9
cross reference that with Eccl. 3: 14.
So this mormon doctrine can be substantiate with biblical doctrine.

Anna - (sorry about above) Matthew 22:30 is being taken out of context. Jesus was teaching about the resurrection of the dead to a sadducces "who say there is no resurrection" vs 23 not teaching the concept of eternal marriage. He only specifies that after the resurrection there is no marriage... he never says the woman wont be married to any of them.
Christ however did teach about the eternal nature of marriage - Mark 10: 7-9
cross reference that with Eccl. 3: 14.
So this mormon doctrine can be substantiate with biblical doctrine.

or in historical records of the ancient Christian Church(By ancient Christian church, I mean before 300 AD)?

I just wanna see what how much I know- please substantiate all evidences with biblical verse or historical document page/paragraph. Please don't quote someone off of sites like exmormon.org or quote what you heard someone once say unless their claim can be substantiated with scholary evidence(preferably a link). :)

eelai- while there have been some racist opinions offered up by some members and leaders of the mormons, blacks not being able to enter heaven without being slaves was never taught. Official mormon doctrine is such :
D&C 134: 12 - issue of slavery
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/134/12#12
D&C 101: 79 - Gods position on slavery
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/101/79#79
If you have real evidence please provide it.

eelai - whats more interesting is every denomination was teaching basically the same thing- it was a cultural teaching of the 1800's. To judge Mormons based on some of Brigham's personal(and I say personal because they were NOT doctrines of the church - see previous mormon doctrine pointed out) you would have to equally judge the Early Christian church as racist for Peter's actions in Galatians 2: 11-14

- DNA research done by only 7 scientists( only 2 of the 7 are actually genetic scientists) on Native Americans does not prove the Isrealites did not come to the american continent: http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2006_DNA_and_the_Book_of_Mormon.html

doug - show me in the book of mormon your claims...

eelai- do you have any proof? Please provide it. All you have now is hearsay

Desiree - 1) Where in the bible does it give the location of heaven? It doesn't say it is not located on another planet.
2) Joseph Smith never taught that there were people on the moon. http://www.lds-mormon.com/moon.shtml
And those who did believe that there were people who dwelled on the moon never claimed it was doctrine as well as it never was taught as doctrine.

SDW - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_for_the_dead#Outside_of_Christianity
This article is a good starting point- there are dozens of other articles that go into more detail how baptisms for the dead were even practiced by the Catholic Church upto around 370 AD.

Anna- Matthew 22:30

Answer 1

So far no one has been able to answer your question. We don't believe blacks are slaves. We don't believe quaker men live on the moon. (That one is absurd). And baptism for the dead is biblical. It talk about it right there. In fact it is historical that very early Christians practiced this. And people that have passed on and have a baptism performed for them get to choose whether they want to accept it or not. What about all the people who died without ever hearing about Christ? Would you just condemn them?

This answer is in response to the first three.

I can tell you what the Mormons teach is more Biblical than any other church.

Answer 2

The idea that married couples stay in families in the after life. Jesus Himself said that "there is no marriage nor giving in marriage in Heaven" when the Jews put the case of a woman who ended up marrying and being widowed of several brothers in the same family. They asked Jesus whose wife she would be in eternity and he said, "None of them!" or words to that effect. See Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25, Luke 20:35 and the surrounding verses.

Also there's a tiny little historical error when horses are mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Horses were not in the New World until Pizarro imported them from Spain. Certainly not back in the times of the ancient Incas and Aztecs, when the book was supposedly written.

Answer 3

See John 1:1 for a concise description of the true nature and character of Jesus Christ.

See the first chapter of Luke (1:31) for a short description of who Jesus really is.

See the Book of Mormon, which makes outrageous claims regarding these matters ... and which prove the Mormon "Jesus" is someone other than the Christian Jesus, who remains the authentic Christ who died on the cross to reconcile man with God, and who is the eternal God, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit ... always was ... and always will be ... while we're not ... and never will be.

Answer 4

http://lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menuitem.b12f9d18fae655bb69095bd3e44916a0/?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=9649d7630a27b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

This is a great article that goes into some of the main differences between traditional christianity and mormon christianity and how mormon beliefs are substantiated in the Bible.



SDW
The baptism is just so that the person will have the ability to continue on with their progression should they choose to accept it. Its not like they are now considered mormon. We just believe that baptism is an essential thing every person must have done in order to be able to progress. If you die before you ever heard the gospel then this gives you the opportunity to not be stuck in the afterlife. Every person will be able to hear the gospel and receive all the blessings of it even if they never got it on earth.



Doug,
why do you think it was the crucifixion that was key to the atonement? The atonement was mostly done in the garden and sealed with the blood of christ on the cross, but it didnt have to be a crucifixion. That wasnt a special kind of death. It was finished with the resurrection.
You dont have any more authority to claim your interpretations of the bible are any more valid than mine or to declare who is christian and who isnt.


Ally
so your definition of a cult and brainwashing is any group that doesnt think and interpret the Bible just like you.
It is just kind of pathetic if that is what you really think. You dont think and believe like I do so does that make you in a cult according to me now and your own logic????

Answer 5

I'll stick with one for now--Baptism of the dead.

Every--and I mean EVERY--Christian baptism in the New Testament has been immediately following a conscious and willful conversion to Christianity. It is in a sense the first act of obedience of a new believer.

The Mormon church practices a sort of 'baptism for the dead.' I am not sure of the specifics of the dogma behind it, but essentially a Mormon is baptized as a proxy for an ancestor of theirs who either was unable to or chose not to be baptized. This completely runs counter to the Biblical teachings regarding baptism, where it is an act of profession of ones individual decision to follow Christ, by suggesting that someone else can make that decision for us.

Answer 6

How about that the "Native Americans" are Israeli in descent. This is taught on the first page of The Book of Mormon and has been proven via DNA evidence to be utterly false.

Answer 7

the doctrine that blacks can only get to heaven if they were slaves.

EDIT:

mormons actually baptized HITLER into the mormon church so that he could be "saved" if he decided to accept jesus.

they also were baptizing dead jews from the holocaust into the mormon church. even though jewish leaders made multiple requests for them to STOP.

that is messed up.

EDIT 2

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind....Cain slew his brother. Can might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, page 290).
"In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds.

We knew that the children of Ham were to be the "SERVANT OF SERVANTS," and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 2, page 172.)


"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 10, page 110.)


-Brigham Young

Answer 8

The part about god living on Kolob or the moon near Kolob...or something like that. And that's just one! There are many others like men who dress like Quakers living on the moon.

Answer 9

Bama-
1)Your first couple arguments are innane. If Jude really meant that the gospel was complete by the time he wrote his epistle, then why was there a need for not only Revelations, but also the Gospel of St John which were written a very long time after Jude was written? Therefore, using your logic, they are not needed and not part of the gospel! Its a rediculous arguement. As far as the title of the Book of Mormon is concerned -are you kidding me? Testiment is different than Gospel. Each book in the bible could be considered its own testiment since it was written at different times in different areas of the old world; all testifying of Christ, which is all part of the same gospel- the book of Mormon included. Your use of Galatians is spurrious at best.
EDIT: Where are you getting your source? Every chronology I have looked up place John's writtings (1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Gospel of John, and Revelations) AFTER Jude in the early 90's, late 80's (with some suggesting the 2nd century!) Jude was written about the same time as as Paul's Epistles. True they dont contradict the earlier doctrines(not in spirit at least) - but they sure do contain NEW information, NEW prophecy, which the author thought was NEEDFUL or why would he write them? But besides all that, where in the Book of Mormon does it contradict the Bible? Which stories? Which morals that are taught?

2) What does the word Christian mean? It means believers of Christ. Since ALL the prophets of the old testiment knew of Christ's comming, they too were followers of Christ- therefore wouldn't that make them Christians as well? So let me ask you something... if you were translating a language, and you came across a title that refered to a group of people who believed in Christ, how would you translate that in english? Would you make up a new word for it, or use a word that had already been defined to mean believers in Christ? Christian maybe? Thats exactly what Joseph Smith did when he TRANSLATED the book of Mormon.
EDIT: So you are saying that Isaiah (among other prophets) who testified of Christ, did not follow the teachings of Christ(which are synonomous with God's teachings)? - not only that but the term Christian was given to them by unbeliever's, as a mockery. It wasn't given by God.

3)If there were no churches before Christ, that taught of Christ, what exactly was the purpose of Jewish synogauges, or congregations? They served the same purpose as the ones in the Book of Mormon.
EDIT: Read the book of Mormon- the church (or congregation) that Alma formed was not the same church as the church that Christ Formed- it was a congregation or a church of people who knew of the coming of Christ, who looked forward to his comming, who taught the commandments- people just like isaiah. Can a follower come before a leader? Of course they can- or do you deny that Isaiah, David, even Moses knew of the comming of a Messiah and abided by law set forth by God?

4) Was Paul married? He wasn't was he? Did you know the word presbytery and Elder are synonymous? Who ordained Timothy? (1 Tim. 4: 14) A Presbytery did? Who was that Presbytery? (2 Tim. 1: 6) Oh my goodness... it was Paul! An unmarried Presbytery / Elder!
EDIT: In Titus and Timothy- all you have to do is read the next few verses to notice that Paul was specifically talking about a Bishop. Titus 1:7 makes that abundantly clear he was refering to a bishop. And how can you not think the two "gifts" paul is mentioning is synonymous? They are used in the exact same context, talking about the exact same event.

5)I suggest you look up the definition of the word "at." Or even more interesting read this article " http://www.jefflindsay.com/BM_Jerusalem.shtml " - wow, you seemed to help vindicate the authenticity of the Book Of Mormon... whoops.
EDIT: read all the definitions not just one of the 3. "at" can also refer to an aproximate location. And apparently you didn't read the above article.

6)Honestly I dont know what you are arguing about with this one. Melchezidek and his priesthood were two seperate things - One a man and the other the Authority to act in the name of God.
EDIT:
Read the full chapter of hebrews- the Melchezidek priesthood is different than the Levitical priesthood.(besides I still dont fully understand what you are arguing on this one)

7) Baptism of the Dead has already been shown up above to historically have been practiced in the early church as well as the ancient Jews... it was practiced, it was proven, and even paul alludes to it. I suggest looking it up in Wikipedia if you dont know how to look it up in any other scholary article.
EDIT: Historical evidence proves that early Christians practiced it and taught it. It's even mentioned in the bible- and when paul says "they" he is refering to the members of the church and teaching members of the church about the importantance of the resurrection, because if the resurrection of the dead does not happen, then why are they(members of the church) practicing it? - You cant just ignore historical evidence and pretend it doesn't have any rammifications.

8)I also didn't see anything contradictory about the 3 days of darkness... it happened at the time of Moses in Egypt- darkness covered the "land" Egypt- not the whole world... this was just a repeat miracle in another certain part of world at another time.
EDIT: Two completely seperate miracles - read the book of Mormon

9) The minor errors the book of mormon is talking about(or the 3000+ changes people say were made) were grammatical / punctuation errors as well as changing the format into verse/ chapter styling. Nothing more. People have done the same thing with the bible... go ahead and look at KJB vs the The new International Version - I can use the same argument you just used against the book of Mormon to the Bible... and since you say that we cant trust the book of Mormon because of this - then how can we trust the Bible who just failed the same test?


10) IF you want to talk about errors/contradictions - lets discuss the bible shall we? Lets forget that in Acts 9 the Men with Paul on the road to damascus "heard a voice, but saw no man" and when the story is told again in Acts 22 they "saw indeed the light" but "heard not the voice" of Christ.There is Matthew misattributing a quote from Zechariah (Zech. 11:12-13) to Jeremiah in Matt. 27: 9-10. If you want more I got hundreds of em. There are over a DOZEN of books mentioned in the Bible that are NOT in the Bible! How is that possible when the Bible is perfect in everyway and infallable. But as I was saying, lets forget about that. I shall now do the impossible- I shall show that Jesus was wrong about one of his prophecies and therefore fallible. In Matt. 12: 40 Jesus says he'll be in the tomb for three days and three nights. We know Jesus was crucified and then taken and buried on Friday before night fall (John 19:31). He was then resurrected Sunday morning. Count the days and nights up: Friday day Friday night :1 day 1 night - Saturday day, Saturday Night, 2 days, 2 nights - Sunday Morning - 3 days, 2 nights. Uh oh! Either Jesus was wrong or the Bible is... which one is it?

Hmmm guess the bible isn't completely infallible is it? But guess what - if you read the book of Mormon thoroughly, it answers this little predicament. Ill give you a hint... its in 3Nephi.
EDIT - Even the little articles you gave me to read, the author specifically says: "First, some scholars appeal to the original Greek text, and suggest that Acts 22:9 has been mistranslated" - or translated incorrectly? If this verse was translated incorrectly, how can you say the others weren't as well?- either way the article is reaching at best.
What about the missing books? What about the missquoting of scriptures by Jesus? What about the inconsistancy of 4 main Gospels (IE time of Jesus's Death, death of Judas, etc)? Did you know that there are even words in the Old testiment left completely out of the original Hebrew- so when the translators read it they simply made up a year, or a date, or even a name(which is why many different versions of the Bible have different dates and times and names)?

Also, Mormons use scripture for exactly what Paul told Timothy to use it for (hey, if it helps your esteem, you actually have more recorded scripture than Timothy had, if you think about it, because you have the writtings of John. )

Ill add my Moral of the story to yours - "If the BIBLE contains errors, which it does, then it cannot be the Word of God and it must be rejected." - unless we have more scripture that verifies and vindicates the Bible,(psst... its The Book of Mormon).

Answer 10

God does not contradict Himself. If the Book of Mormon and the Bible contradict each other then they cannot both be God's inspired word, as Mormons claim.

There are many areas where Mormon "scripture" conflicts with the Bible. There is not enough room to list them all, but I would like to highlight a few.

Mormons teach that there are latter day revelations. The Bible says, "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 3) Notice "the faith" (or the system of faith) "WAS ONCE delivered." This is past tense. This leaves no room for latter day revelations

The English Standard Version and that the New American Standard Version translate this verse, "…the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." ("Once for all" is very clear.)

Mormons teach that an angel gave Joseph Smith the Book of Mormon. They call it "ANOTHER Testament". The Bible says, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-9)

The Book of Mormon teaches that believers were called "Christians" in 73 BC. (Alma 46:15) The Bible says that the desciples were called "Christians first in Antioch". (Acts 11:26) This was about 41 AD.

The Book of Mormon talks about the church, also in Alma 46:15. According to the Book of Mormon this was about 73 BC. About 100 years later though, Jesus said "I will build my church" (Matthew 16:18). This means that the church was yet to be established in the future. (It was established shortly after Christ rose from the dead. (See Acts 2.)

Mormons also call young, unmarried men "Elders". The Bible says an Elder must be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2, Titus 1:6) and have children that believe (1 Timothy 3:4, Titus 1:6).

The book of Mormon teaches Jesus was to be born at Jerusalem (Alma 7:10). The Bible teaches Jesus was born in Bethlehem. (Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:1)

The Book of Mormon teaches that Melchizedek reigned under his father. (Alma 13:18) The Bible teaches his priesthood was without father. (Hebrews 7:3)

Mormons teach that one person can be baptized for another who has already died. Jesus taught "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved". (Mark 16:16) "He... shall be saved". Not he is baptized and someone else shall be saved. We will each be judged by what we have done, not on the basis of what someone else has done. (2 Cor. 5:10)

The Book of Mormon teaches that at Christ's death, darkness covered the land for three DAYS. (3 Nephi 8:19-23) The Bible says it was three HOURS. (Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, Luke 23:44)

Mormons teach that the Book of Mormon is the word of God and that Joseph Smith translated it into English with the help of God. On the introduction page of the copy I have, there is a statement that "some minor errors" have existed in past editions that were corrected in this publication. If it were God's word and translated with the help of God, then how did it have ANY errors, no matter how "minor"?

Also, if there are or were minor errors, how can the book be trusted to be correct in the major things (things that relate to showing us how to serve God and how to be saved)?

The Bible is the word of God and it is all we need for our doctrine, for reproof, to correct error, and to teach! (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

I don't mean for these comments to be harsh, but there are many areas where the Bible does not agree with Mormon doctrine. I have given just a few examples and I have cited verses from the Bible and verses from the Book of Mormon so you can investigate it for yourself.

If the Book of Mormon contains errors, which it does, then it cannot be the Word of God and it must be rejected.

The Book of Mormon admits that it has contained "minor errors" in the past, so how can we trust it now?

-----------------------------
edit
----------------------------

To Max:

I apologize to everyone else for using up so much space, but let me reply to Max who saw fit to address me, rather than answering the question that was asked. I will number my replies to correspond with the numbers in his post.

1) There is quite a bit of controversy over the dates that the Gospel of John was written, with some giving dates as early as 50 AD. Also with Revelation, some believe it was written about 67-68 AD, while others believe it was written about 95-96 AD. Jude is believed to have been written between 66 and 90 AD. It is highly likely, therefore, that Revelation is the only book of the New Testament written after Jude, and it is possible that Jude is indeed the final book.

In any case, if there are books after Jude, those that may fit into that category do not teach anything new that contradict those written before Jude, and it does not alter the teaching of Jude 3. Also, if Revelation was penned after Jude, one should notice that that book does not include any new commandments for the church to follow. Rather, it is a book of prophecy and encouragement; therefore it was accurate for Jude to say the faith (or the Gospel, the system of faith) was already delivered for all the saints.

The Book of Mormon, however, as you have pointed out, adds things that you seem to indicate that the Bible would be incomplete without. For this, I refer you again to Galatians, as well as 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:3.

2) You said, “Since ALL the prophets of the old testament knew of Christ’s coming, they too were followers of Christ – therefore… Christians as well”. Can a “follower” come before the leader? Could they follow the commandments of Christ when those commandments had not yet been issued?

God had promised a “new name” to his followers. This new name was given first in Antioch (about 41 AD) – “Christians”.

3) The Book of Alma talks about churches that were comprised of Christians. The Christian church came when Christ established it (Acts 2). In Matthew 16:18, this was still in the future.

4) Yes, I do know the word presbytery and elder (or eldership, or council of elders) are synonymous, however, to assume that Paul was saying he was an elder cannto be done from these two verses. First, in this same context (and also in Titus), Paul is the one who said that an Elder must be the husband of one wife and have children that believe. Secondly, to conclude that Paul was an Elder, you must assume the gift in 1 Timothy 4:14 is the same gift in 2 Timothy 1:6. There is not enough information here to make that assumption stick, therefore it is just a mere guess, and highly unlikely.

5) “At”, according to the American Heritage Dictionary, means “In the location of”. I think the word you were hoping for is “near”, but this only fits in a fairly loose sense of the term. Bethlehem is still a pretty healthy walk from Jerusalem.

6) Melchezidek’s father was not a priest before him. Under the Levitical priesthood, the priesthood was passed down through family lines.

7) Something called baptism for the dead is mentioned once in the Bible (1 Corinthians 15:29). This verse neither commands this practice, nor condones it, but just notes something someone else (“they”, not “you”, the church) was doing in order to make a point. This no more condones baptism for the dead than was Paul noticed the various altars to false gods a sign that he approved of that practice. (Acts 17:16-24)

Jesus said “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). Mormons say a person can believe and be baptized so someone else can be saved. That is not the same thing Jesus said. The Bible is clear that we will each be judged based on what we have done (2 Cor. 5:10).

Notice Ezekiel 18:20, “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”

8) An Hour is not a day.

9-10) The Bible has never been ever shown to have a single proven error or contradiction. The examples you have shown are easily reconciled!
The Bible is the complete word of God and it is all we need. The Book of Mormon, however, has not been shown to meet the same degree of reliability.

For answers to the alleged discrepancies you have mentioned, I have provided links below.