Many people claim that the Bible warns of those that will add or take from it (you can read the verse below). However, Moses said nearly the exact same thing in Deuteronomy. So, either the Bible says no such thing OR every book AFTER Deuteronomy is false. You can't have it both ways.
So, are you going to continue quoting this scripture, knowing it's not meaning that?
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
2007-11-29
03:32:17
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Ender
6
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Um...deuteronomy is the 5th, not last, book in the Old testament. There were LOTS of other old testament books written after it. Sorry, but your logic sucks.
2007-11-29
04:08:58 ·
update #1
If you would read the book of mormon you would notice that it speaks of Jesus Christ from cover to cover. So when you read not to add or take away from the book of revelations or you should not add or take away from the book of deuteronmy. That is exactly what it means. The bible consists of 66 books but people see it as one. Now the book of mormon has 15 books in it and none contradict the bible. I know you are going to bring up the false doctrines of the lds church but those doctrines are not in the book of mormon. They are from other books they have. Hope this helps you understand a little better. God bless you all.
2007-11-29 03:48:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by furgetabowdit 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
What many people fail to realize is that the Bible did not even exist as a "book" until hundreds of years after John's Revelation. And, technically speaking, the word "Bible" comes from the Greek biblia, which means "books" (notice the plural). So why don't these verses prohibit adding to or taking away from "these books", instead of "this book"?
A closer look at 22:18-19 will reveal that John is referring to some "book of prophecy"... Although the Bible does contain several prophecies scattered throughout its pages, as a whole it is not generally considered a book of prophecy; rather, the Bible is mostly a book of history and religious advice. So, what book of prophesy could John possibly be referring to? Perhaps... it is the same book to which he refers in the first chapter of the same book! What a concept!
Rev 1:3
Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Rev 1:10-11
I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
2007-11-29 05:03:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by all star 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Revelation is the First Book in the Bible, so all other books or letters that comes after it, is false.
But the Book of Mormon was written long before the Bible here in the Americas
So is the Bible wrong?
No, just in your mind will it come to pass
2007-11-29 07:51:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dan W- the thing is that we (LDS) are judged all the time, and I think this question is merely trying to understand that judgement.....
Look at how the titles of the books in the Bible are written, they're "the Book of Isaiah" and "the book of Job"....
Then if you look at Rev 22:19- it says, "If any man shall take away from the words of the book of THIS prophesy..." (emphasis added)
John's warning seems to be specifically about his revelation/vision.
Looking at the makeup of the New Testament this is how I understand it......
1) 4 different accounts of Jesus' life and ministry- all written after His death and resurrection.
2) letters by various early Christian leaders- written at various times, from various locations, addressing various issues (some written before, some after John's revelation).
3) the record of a revelation... which has a warning about changing the record of that revelation.
If one were to re-organize the New Testament in chronological order according to when each book was written, I think we'd all be surprised....
(I also think that if the Old Testament were to be rearanged the same way... again, it could prove to be surprising.)
2007-11-29 05:14:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Yoda's Duck 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Certainly not! The answers given by Isolde, Endure, and the other positive thinkers should ring the bells of those disparaging excuses that the Book of Mormon is altering or replacing the Bible. Such juvenile approaches to a logical, mature response to the divinity of Jesus Christ leaves a sour taste in my mental taste buds.
2007-11-29 11:06:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Guitarpicker 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
When Nephi of the Book of Mormon sees all the end of the world stuff too, he is commanded not to write it down because it was specifically John the Revelator's calling, and his alone:
" 20 And the angel said unto me: Behold one of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
21 Behold, he shall see and write the remainder of these things; yea, and also many things which have been.
22 And he shall also write concerning the end of the world.
23 Wherefore, the things which he shall write are just and true; and behold they are written in the book which thou beheld proceeding out of the mouth of the Jew; and at the time they proceeded out of the mouth of the Jew, or, at the time the book proceeded out of the mouth of the Jew, the things which were written were plain and pure, and most precious and easy to the understanding of all men.
24 And behold, the things which this apostle of the Lamb shall write are many things which thou hast seen; and behold, the remainder shalt thou see.
25 But the things which thou shalt see hereafter thou shalt not write; for the Lord God hath ordained the apostle of the Lamb of God that he should awrite them."
I'd say it's more accurate to say that the Book of Mormon talks about that scripture in making it clear that John alone should write about the second coming.
2007-11-29 04:03:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by daisyk 6
·
7⤊
0⤋
It's amazing how many people do quote that scripture to discredit the Book of Mormon. The Bible itself is a compilation of books. So John was speaking only about the Book of Revelation. In fact the only time the Bible was mentioned in it's entirety is in Ezekiel chapter 37 when it speaks of the stick or record of the tribe of Judah. In that same chapter we learn also about the stick or record of the tribe of Joseph which is the Book of Mormon.
2007-11-29 03:56:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bubblewrap 4
·
9⤊
0⤋
It means that you should not add or take away from the individual book mentioned. Just because we sandwiched the books together over time does not mean they were written to be read in order. In other words, they are all from the same source of inspiration, and we can cross-reference them. But we should not think of them like we do
encyclopedias. They were not written for that purpose.
So, we really are not adding to them unless we alter what was written in the individual books.
2007-11-29 04:01:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Ha ha. I was about to come in here laughing and saying that anyone who thinks the verse in revelation refers to the whole bible clearly does not know the history of the bible. Then I read your question.
Thanks for pointing that out more clearly than I have ever been able to.
2007-11-29 03:38:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by gumby 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
You gotta be kiddin' me. Don't you have anything better to do with your day than to study every word in the Bible just looking for ways to JUDGE other people's religions and ways of life? I can think of one statement somewhere in the Bible -- JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED, or LET HE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE... something like that. Since I don't sit around with my nose in the Bible all day long, I can't point out the exact verse, paragraph number, page number and all that jazz.
I'm going to take my own advice and let Y!A be here while I go out and get some business taken care of and other stuff DONE.
2007-11-29 04:45:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋