Joseph smith, muhammed, Charles Russelll, Further prophecies?

Question

If we agree on the book of revelations,
and we agree that Gabriel Showed John the antichrist, the destruction of the beast , and the saints entering paradise

then... What further revelation was there for moroni, muhammed, Joseph smith or anyone else to reveal?

Why make another revelation if John had already seen the conclusion and the fate of the world?

On the chirsitan aspect, If the mormons and the Jw's agree with the book of revelations,

then why have the JW's been allowed to make multiple predictions with regards to Judgement day when the bible says no man knows the day except the Father

why more did morni have to reveal when John saw it all and wrote it down for us

what did Gabriel have to say to Muhammed when he already showed Jhon everything else that was to happen to the world

and if muslims don't beleive the ibble why do you insist that all the bible prophets are your prophets?

and if they are, when they say one man one wife, why do you not beleiv?

Happily:

If muhammeed is the perfect ambassador of islam, and the perfect ambassador of how i should live my life, what perfect muslim family do you think will perfectly let me marry their 6 yr old daughter?

if you disagree, then muhammed is not your ambassador, and islam should not be your releigoen as you can't live up to it's ideal

thanks, now back to my question

Prirate:

666 adds up to the pope also, who of course nero is not

Using the Roman alpha numeric system

Vicarius filii dei, representative of the son of god adds up to 666

was nero cast into a lake of fire?

Did nero's empire last for 1260 days?

did nero change the 10 commandments?

did hitler?

the pope qualifies for all those points,
back to the question

Happily: God said to saul, why are you persecuting me
because he was killing christians God told him to stop, compare that to muahmmeds message

no wonder why islam seeks to insult paul so much

as he was told to stop killing chrisitans
God said why are you peresecuting me:

so by killing another human, we are killing something made in the image of God, which is why God said you shall not kill

Muhammed argues differently

Answer 1

Criticism

Critics claim that the Book of Mormon cannot be true because nothing should be "added to" or "taken away from" the Holy Bible.

Source(s) of the criticism

"[Joseph] Smith apparently was either oblivious to the expressed warning about adding to or substracting from the Word of God, or willfully disobedient to it (see Rev. 22:18,19)." - "Dr." Walter Martin, Mormonism (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1984), 29.

Response

The verse often cited (as by Martin, above) is Rev. 22:18-19:

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: 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.

Critics claim that this verse states that the Bible is complete, and no other scripture exists or will be forthcoming.

However, the critics ignore that:

The book of Revelation was written prior to some of the other biblical books, and prior the Bible being assembled into a collection of texts. Therefore, this verse can only apply to the Book of Revelation, and not the Bible as a whole (some of which was unwritten and none of which was yet assembled together into 'the Bible'). While the traditional date of the book of Revelation is A.D. 95 or 96 (primarily based on a statement by Irenaeus), most scholars now date it as early as A.D. 68 or 69. The Gospel of John is generally dated A.D. 95-100. (For more information on the dating of Revelation, see Thomas B. Slater's Biblica article).

The New Testament is made up of first the four Gospels and then second the epistles of the apostles. Since the book of Revelation is neither a gospel nor an epistle, it was placed at the end of the canon in its own category. Therefore, John cannot have intended the last few sentences of Revelation to apply to the entire Bible, since he was not writing a 'final chapter' for the New Testament and since the Bible would not be completed and canonized for some centuries later.
Other scriptures (such as Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32, and Proverbs 30:6) likewise forbid additions; were the critics' arguments to be self-consistent, they would have to then discard everything in the New Testament and much of the Old, since these verses predate "other scripture" added by God through later prophets.

Further evidence that Rev. 22:19 is not referring to the entire bible when it reads "words of the book of this prophecy" is found if one reads Rev. 1:11:

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.

It is self evident that the book referred to at the very beginning of Revelation is the same book being referred to at the very end of Revelation. Everything that John saw and heard in between these two statements are the contents of that book.

The Bible forbids men to add to the Word of God; it does not forbid that God may, through a prophet, add to the Word of God. If this were not possible, then the Bible could never have come into existence.

Noted Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman wrote:

The very real danger that [New Testament] texts could be modified at will, by scribes who did not approve of their wording, is evident in other ways as well. We need always to remember that the copyists of the early Christian writings were reproducing their texts in a world in which there were not only no printing presses or publishing houses but also no such thing as copyright law. How could authors guarantee that their texts were not modified once put into circulation? The short answer is that they could not. That explains why authors would sometimes call curses down on any copyists who modified their texts without permission. We find this kind of imprecation already in one early Christian writing that made it into the New Testament, the book of Revelation, whose author, near the end of his text, utters a dire warning [quotes Revelation 22:18–19].
This is not a threat that the reader has to accept or believe everything written in this book of prophecy, as it is sometimes interpreted; rather, it is a typical threat to copyists of the book, that they are not to add to or remove any of its words. Similar imprecations can be found scattered throughout the range of early Christian writings.[1]
This threat was a real threat in John's eyes. Unfortunately, it appears that the threat went unheeded. The Book of Mormon prophet Nephi saw the same things that John the Beloved saw, but was not authorized to write them (1 Nephi 14:21-25). He made this interesting prophesy.

Wherefore, thou seest that after the book [the Bible] hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God (1 Nephi 13:28).
Nephi is later promised that the Lord would send forth other books such as the Book of Mormon to restore those precious and plain things that were taken away.

These last records [The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, etc], which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first [The Bible], which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and previous things which have been taken away from them... (1 Nephi 13:40)

Conclusion

The critics misuse Revelation, misunderstand the process by which the Bible cannon was formed, and must ignore other, earlier scriptures to maintain their position. Their use of this argument is a form of begging the question whereby they presume at the outset that the Book of Mormon and other scriptures are not the Word of God, which is precisely the point under debate. In its proper context, the passage in Revelation actually supports the teachings of the Book of Mormon that many plain and precious things would be taken away from the Bible. It also shows clearly the need for another book of scripture like the Book of Mormon to restore those lost and sacred teachings. If the Book of Mormon and other modern scriptures are the work of uninspired men or the arm of flesh, then of course one ought not to trust them. If, however, they are indeed the word of the Lord to prophets, then all who desire to be saved ought to carefully heed them.

The ancient Book of Mormon prophet Nephi understood how critics would respond to the Book of Mormon. His answer for the critics is thus:

Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more! And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall. Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough! For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have. Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. (2 Nephi 28:26-31)

Endnotes

[1] Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (HarperSanFrancisco, [2005]2007), 54–55. ISBN 0060859512. ISBN 0060738170.

Answer 2

First, we don't agree that Revelations is about the end times as the evidence points to it being written about Rome and Nero. Consider that Caesar Nero adds up to 666 in Hebrew, and that it was not written by the apostle John, but a hermit John that was highly annoyed by the Romans.

Answer 3

Jesus is the final and fullness of all revelation. There is nothing else to be revealed after Him. This makes Smith and Russell and Muhammed false prophets.

By the way, the pope is not evil. His is the Vicar of Christ, Head of His Holy Church.

God bless and Merry Christmas.

Answer 4

Well, let's look at some things. Didn't Daniel also have a vision of the end of times and he recorded it in the Old Testament. Isaiah also had an even more extensive vision of the end of times and the gathering of Israel... yet why the need for the New Testament? Well, as a Christian, we understand what the need is. It is to continue teaching us line upon line. The people were ready for more light and knowledge from God. (see Isaiah 28:9-13; Luke 8:18)

Also, look at the history of the Bible. The Samaritins said something very similar to what you are saying. They claimed that since Moses was Gods Prophet and God had revealed to Moses so much, why would we need another Prophet or more scripture? Hence, they only accepted the first 5 books of the Old Testament as scripture and denied the rest. Jews alike say there is no more need for further books because the Old Testament contains all we need. Well, the truth is that everything we learn in the New Testament has it's root in the Old Testament. But this we can say about revelation and books of scripture. Every time there was a Prophet of God upon the earth, there were scriptures that were written. That was the case in the Old Testament. When the Prophets were taken away from the Jews, scripture stopped. When Jesus came to earth, he called Apostles who were also Prophets and then scripture began to be written and added to the Bible. But, when the Apostles were all killed, scripture again stopped being written and the Catholics closed the cannon. When Joseph Smith was called, scripture was again added. When Mohammad was called, scripture was again written, but not added to the Bible since Muslims do not believe the Bible to be actual scripture (that I know of).

So why did we need the New Testament if everything was contained in the Old Testament? The answer is that everything was not contained in the Old Testament and God still had more to teach us. So why do we need the Book of Mormon and other Books of scripture if the Bible contains all we need to know. The answer is the same because it doesn't contain all we need to know because God wanted to reveal more to us and that is what he did.

As for the scripture at the end of Revelations that says nothing should be added to taken away from this book, etc. That scripture was written nearly 250 years before the New Testament was even compiled together. That scripture only pertains to the Book of Revelations, and the Book of Revelations was not the last book written. Some of the Gospels such as the Gospel of John were written after that, along with many of the epistles of Paul. So obviously he was not saying that God will not give us any more scripture.
If you study the history of the New Testament and it's compilation you would realize that scribes were making many errors in making copies of the texts, whether intentional or unintentional. It was becoming a serious problem and because of this, people would place those sort of curses on their books trying to scare scribes from taking liberty to change the texts as they felt necessary. In that time, there were no copy machines or printing presses. The only way a copy of a book could be made was to sit down and write it out by hand. You try it some time and look at how many mistakes you make. And then when someone made a copy of a copy, not only would they copy the first mistake, but they would make more of their own mis-spelling words that would give the sentence new meaning or skipping lines all together, and to make matters worse... did you know that for the first 300 years, almost all of the scribes who were hired to do this were not even literate enough to write their own names? It wasn't until Constantine took Christianity under its wing that professional paid scribes who could read began to make the copies. At that point, the number of errors in the transcripts decreased significantly. Today we Christian scholars do not have the originals or even copies of the originals. We only have copies or the copies of the copies 100's of copies down the line. It is said among Christian scholars that there are more errors in the New Testament than there are words. See my sources for your own referance. What I am sharing is not LDS doctrine, it's fact that I've learned as I've studying the history of the New Testament.

With the above being true, it is all the more necessary for God to again come to His people and reveal more. You talk about the book of Revelations and it prophesying of the Anti Christ and false prophets. All of this is true, but All throughout the Old Testament, God said that he would in the latter days gather His people again. Doesn't it make complete sense that just like he called Moses to gather Israel and deliver them from Egypt, that to fulfill the greatest prophesy ever given to us by God, that He again would call a Prophet in the last days to gather Israel once again, not just to a certain place, but also doctrinally so that they can be one in Christ? You forget about the fulfilling of the Old Testament prophesies as well. And if you studied Mormon Doctrine on the Book of Revelations, we also believe that the Restoration of His church upon the earth and the Book of Mormon fulfill parts of the book of Revelations. see (Revelations 14: 6) which Mormons believe was fulfilled by Moroni, hence the gold statue at the top of most Mormon Temples.

God promised Ishmael and his mother that God would make of Ishmael's posterity a great nation. Where do we see the fulfillment of that prophesy in any other way other than when Mohamad (an ignorant sheep herder) saw the vision of the angel Gabriel and began to establish Islam among the posterity of Ishmael? I'm not saying I believe Mohammad was a Prophet. I'm just saying that I withold judgement until the after life, and if Mohammad was a Prophet, that doesn't mean that my religion or that Christianity is false. God gave them what they needed. The radical Muslims who have hijacked the faith today don't necessarily represent Islam. We might say that we know they do because of all the violent passages of scripture in the Koran. Yet if you listen to any of the Atheist views of Christianity and the Bible on You Tube, you will see them quoting numbers of passages (even more than the Koran) that were just as violent, if not worse. Scripture is meant to be understood in context with the Holy Ghost.

Answer 5

Your question is as confusing as you are...One thing is certain The BIBLE (KJV) is THE FINAL AUTHORITY!
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.”

Answer 6

The emergence of these so-called prophets are prophecied in the bible. Without these, the bible would not be true to its words.
Christ mentioned false Christs and false prophets, as written

Matthew 24
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

Indeed, bible is inspired by God.

Answer 7

Revelation 22: 18-19: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

Those who disagree, who claim there has been further revelation, another prophet, since Jesus died and was resurrected are false prophets. Let the Word of God stand.

Answer 8

Why did you miss st. paul??
BTW, book of revelation is extremely confusing and anything can be derived from the book. Read The Holy Quran and learn how clear a revealed book should read.

Answer 9

Arghghghgh! The stupid. It burns!!!