Bible alone?

[disciple]

Greetings,
I would be interested in hearing from some Mormon's on this question. Can a man be saved, become born again, receive eternal life, etc., by having only the 66 books of the Bible? Thanks.

[disciple]

Originally Posted by childofgod

Can salvation come by having only part of the gospel? Your question makes it seem like you believe salvation is dependent on the Bible when its not.

A gospel that limits Jesus to 66 books is no gospel at all. The Bible teaches salvation but a belief in the Bible will never actually bring salvation itself. That is only through Jesus Christ. However, part of that is having correct doctrines.

The prophets never said prophets were exclusive to Jerusalem. The Bible alone is not a true principle. The books in the Canon have changed over time such as the Revelation of Peter once being part of it

Perhaps you didn't understand my question, I'll reword it. Can a man come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ with the truth revealed in the Bible? You said "that a gospel that limits Jesus to 66 books is no gospel at all." Here are just a few of many verses that disagree with that statement.

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.” Rom. 1:16

“So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” Rom. 10:17

“In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.” Eph. 1:13-14

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by disciple

Can a man come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ with the truth revealed in the Bible? .....


"that a gospel that limits Jesus to 66 books is no gospel at all."[/B] Here are just a few of many verses that disagree with that statement.

...

The answer to your question is - YES!


The person's answer you quoted is both in error, and very silly.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

Perhaps you didn't understand my question, I'll reword it. Can a man come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ with the truth revealed in the Bible? You said "that a gospel that limits Jesus to 66 books is no gospel at all." Here are just a few of many verses that disagree with that statement.

Your statement is contradictory in and of itself. For instance, the Bible which only has 66 books in it, is a very modern Protestant version of the scriptures. In fact, the version containing 73 books is still the most popular version.
Does this mean you are asking whether anyone having more than 66 books can not know salvation?
Seems to me that if you are saved knowing 66 books, then knowing more could not hurt....
Perhaps then you meant that having less than the allotted 66 Protestant books means you can not gain a knowledge of salvation? If that is true, then you have written off all the Christians for the first 300 years???
And as its are already pointed out to you, having a knowledge of salvation will not, and can not, save anybody. As with Adam and Eve, simply gaining knowledge of truth can actually get you into trouble.
I will disagree with the other poster however; you have not limited God in your beliefs, you are only limiting yourself.
I think you need to rethink, rework, rephrase, rewrite and then clarify your question a bit more first.

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

Your statement is contradictory in and of itself. For instance, the Bible which only has 66 books in it, is a very modern Protestant version of the scriptures. In fact, the version containing 73 books is still the most popular version.
Does this mean you are asking whether anyone having more than 66 books can not know salvation?
Seems to me that if you are saved knowing 66 books, then knowing more could not hurt....
Perhaps then you meant that having less than the allotted 66 Protestant books means you can not gain a knowledge of salvation? If that is true, then you have written off all the Christians for the first 300 years???
And as its are already pointed out to you, having a knowledge of salvation will not, and can not, save anybody. As with Adam and Eve, simply gaining knowledge of truth can actually get you into trouble.
I will disagree with the other poster however; you have not limited God in your beliefs, you are only limiting yourself.
I think you need to rethink, rework, rephrase, rewrite and then clarify your question a bit more first.

Ok I will rephrase, can a man come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ with the truth revealed in the Bible without the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price?

[Christian]

Originally Posted by childofgod

Can salvation come by having only part of the gospel? Your question makes it seem like you believe salvation is dependent on the Bible when its not.

A gospel that limits Jesus to 66 books is no gospel at all. The Bible teaches salvation but a belief in the Bible will never actually bring salvation itself. That is only through Jesus Christ. However, part of that is having correct doctrines.

The prophets never said prophets were exclusive to Jerusalem. The Bible alone is not a true principle. The books in the Canon have changed over time such as the Revelation of Peter once being part of it

Please SHOW US that joey smith's fantasies are any part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Then read 1 Corinthians 15:1ff. . .THAT is the gospel...ALL of it.

THEN SHOW US HOW JESUS BUILT A CHURCH THAT WOULD 'lose' part of its Gospel, WHAT you think was lost, and WHY you think joey smith's fantasies = more gospel.

THEN read Galatians 1:6-10 to see what your 'new' gospel will get you. . .

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

Ok I will rephrase, can a man come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ with the truth revealed in the Bible without the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price?

You did not really rephrase it, you simply repeated your first nonsensical question while hiding the part which shows the fallacy in your question. All you did was make your position even more vague so as not to have to commit to anything.
For instance, you never stated exactly WHAT Bible/s you are talking about?
One of the Early Christian collections?
The Catholic Bible?
The Orthodox Bibles?
Or the Modern Protestant Bible?

You wouldn't want me to answer based on inadequate or potentially false information would you?

[theway]

Does anyone know of a good forum for Mormon - Modern Christian debate.
This one is sooooooo.... dead, although it really was not very good to begin with, and CARM has become too restrictive.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by theway

Does anyone know of a good forum for Mormon - Modern Christian debate.
This one is sooooooo.... dead, although it really was not very good to begin with, and CARM has become too restrictive.

The best one I know of is probably patheos.com

"Patheos is a non-denominational, non-partisan online media company providing information and commentary from various religious and nonreligious perspectives.

Upon its launch in May 2009, the website was primarily geared toward learning about religions through a reference library and other peer-reviewed resources on 27 global religions. In its current form, the site also hosts more than 450 blogs in eleven "Faith Channels," offering commentary and news from these perspectives in topics including politics, ins***utions, culture, sacred texts, history, lifestyle, entertainment, family life, and business. Patheos is the largest English language religion and spirituality site in the world, while the Catholic, Progressive Christian, Atheist, and Pagan Channels cons***ute the largest web presence for each of their respective traditions."

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

You did not really rephrase it, you simply repeated your first nonsensical question while hiding the part which shows the fallacy in your question. All you did was make your position even more vague so as not to have to commit to anything.
For instance, you never stated exactly WHAT Bible/s you are talking about?
One of the Early Christian collections?
The Catholic Bible?
The Orthodox Bibles?
Or the Modern Protestant Bible?

You wouldn't want me to answer based on inadequate or potentially false information would you?

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, based on the evasiveness, childishness and rudeness of this witness it is evident that he
knows that the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price have no bearing on salvation
and further more his fear of being wrong has made him sarcastic.
I rest my case.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, based on the evasiveness, childishness and rudeness of this witness it is evident that he
knows that the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price have no bearing on salvation
and further more his fear of being wrong has made him sarcastic.
I rest my case.

LOL.... There aren't even enough people who visit this site to make up a 12 person jury.
However, I would call everybody's attention to the fact that you have yet to pick which Bible it is you are talking about?
As a person on the witness stand, I am perfectly within my rights to ask for clarification of your question first before answering.
Yet you not only refused to clarify your question, you made it even more confusing.
So when I once again asked you to explain your contradictory question, you instead took "The Fifth Amendment" fearing self incrimination.

But it really doesn't matter, as I in fact, have already answered your question... Or should I say, I got you to answer it for me without you even realizing it... My case was proven at the point you realized the facility of your question. That's why the judge, jury and audience have already gone home.... Please turn the lights off on your way out.

LOL.... It's just too easy sometimes...

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

LOL.... There aren't even enough people who visit this site to make up a 12 person jury.
However, I would call everybody's attention to the fact that you have yet to pick which Bible it isyou are talking about?
Instead you took "The Fifth Amendment" fearing self incrimination.

I in fact, already answered your question... Or should I say, I got you to answer it for me without you even realizing it...

It's just too easy sometimes.

I think everyone including you knows what Bible I'm referring to. But so your clear I use NKJV.
Glad you have a sense of humor.

[theway]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

The best one I know of is probably patheos.com

"Patheos is a non-denominational, non-partisan online media company providing information and commentary from various religious and nonreligious perspectives.

Upon its launch in May 2009, the website was primarily geared toward learning about religions through a reference library and other peer-reviewed resources on 27 global religions. In its current form, the site also hosts more than 450 blogs in eleven "Faith Channels," offering commentary and news from these perspectives in topics including politics, ins***utions, culture, sacred texts, history, lifestyle, entertainment, family life, and business. Patheos is the largest English language religion and spirituality site in the world, while the Catholic, Progressive Christian, Atheist, and Pagan Channels cons***ute the largest web presence for each of their respective traditions."

Thanks, I notice one of the Scholars on there used to be in my Ward a year ago.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

I think everyone including you knows what Bible I'm referring to. But so your clear I use NKJV.
Glad you have a sense of humor.

I take it then you believe that only the New King James Version, aka, "The Protestant Bible" is the only version that contains the saving gospel.
Does that mean that you believe that only Protestants are saved because they have 66 books as opposed to the old 80 books?

That's begs the question... What was wrong with the Old King James Version of the Bible???

Or any of the Versions before that?

[disciple]

Originally Posted by childofgod

Well that answer took long enough to give. Here's a question for your question: the Old and New Testaments are two different accounts of the Messiah's dealings with the people, the former being through revelations through the prophets and the latter being direct, physical dealings prior to revelations through the apostles and more prophets. The Jews of today believe in the teachings found in the Old Testament, or the Tanakh to them. With all of that said, the question is can the Jews obtain salvation through the Messiah by following just the principles found in the Tanakh without following anything in the New Testament?

There is no difference between the means of salvation found in the Old and New Testaments. The “Scriptures” mentioned in the New Testament are overwhelmingly
Old Testament. In Romans 4 the apostle Paul makes it very clear that the Old Testament way of salvation was the same as the New Testament way, which is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. To prove this, Paul points us to Abraham, who was saved by faith: “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (Romans 4:3). Again, Paul quotes the Old Testament to prove his point—Genesis 15:6, this time. Abraham could not have been saved by keeping the Law, because he lived over 400 years before the Law was given.
In John 5:39 we read, “You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me;” Jesus was obviously referring to Old Testament that spoke of Him. In Luke 24:27 it is stated “Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures.” Again Luke states in Acts 17:11 referring to the Berean believers, “These Jews were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica; for they eagerly received the message, examining the scriptures carefully every day to see if these things were so.” So yes salvation can be found in the Old Testament because it’s the same Savior found in the New Testament.

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

I take it then you believe that only the New King James Version, aka, "The Protestant Bible" is the only version that contains the saving gospel.
Does that mean that you believe that only Protestants are saved because they have 66 books as opposed to the old 80 books?

That's begs the question... What was wrong with the Old King James Version of the Bible???

Or any of the Versions before that?

The Gospel is for all humanity. You act as if those you consider "protestant" are happily hoping everyone not protestant is going to end up in hell. True followers of Jesus Christ want the same things He wants. My point is obvious, if you believe that the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price have some role in salvation you are sincerely wrong.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

The Gospel is for all humanity. You act as if those you consider "protestant" are happily hoping everyone not protestant is going to end up in hell. True followers of Jesus Christ want the same things He wants. My point is obvious, if you believe that the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price have some role in salvation you are sincerely wrong.

Unsurprisingly, you did not answer my question... What is wrong with a Bible that has more books than the Modern "New" version?

If you can be saved with 80 books instead of only 66 books, then you are admitting it doesn't matter whether someone had more scripture... Or less, (depending which side you are looking from).
But then your question is false by its premise. A book, even a book of scripture, has no power to save anyone.
It is merely a tool like prayer, fasting, good works, repentance... Etc, etc.... They are all tools or maps leading to salvation. So what does it matter to you if I have more information to go on, thereby making the road ahead easier?

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

Unsurprisingly, you did not answer my question... What is wrong with a Bible that has more books than the Modern "New" version?

If you can be saved with 80 books instead of only 66 books, then you are admitting it doesn't matter whether someone had more scripture... Or less, (depending which side you are looking from).
But then your question is false by its premise. A book, even a book of scripture, has no power to save anyone.
It is merely a tool like prayer, fasting, good works, repentance... Etc, etc.... They are all tools or maps leading to salvation. So what does it matter to you if I have more information to go on, thereby making the road ahead easier?

The information must be true or the road leads to hell. Try the narrow way.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

The information must be true or the road leads to hell. Try the narrow way.

That is why I don't rely on one's opinion or ones interpretation of scripture... Even if it is my own.
That is also why the number of books, our volume of scripture has little to do with salvation.
If I have a thousand books of scripture it will make little difference to my spiritual growth if I understand and apply it incorrectly.
Likewise, if I am able to correctly interpret one book of scripture and have it confirmed by the Holy Ghost to be true... Then I am far far better off. (But that still will not make me saved)

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

That is why I don't rely on one's opinion or ones interpretation of scripture... Even if it is my own.
That is also why the number of books, our volume of scripture has little to do with salvation.
If I have a thousand books of scripture it will make little difference to my spiritual growth if I understand and apply it incorrectly.
Likewise, if I am able to correctly interpret one book of scripture and have it confirmed by the Holy Ghost to be true... Then I am far far better off. (But that still will not make me saved)

How are you saved Way?

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

How are you saved Way?

I'm going to take it that you are referring to Salvation from spiritual death... That being the case the answer is....

AOF 3: We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

I'm going to take it that you are referring to Salvation from spiritual death... That being the case the answer is....

AOF 3: We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

AOF 3 says, you must obey the following to be saved ,AOF 4: "We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost."
But in the New Testament, obviously written before your AOF we have many verses that don't agree, here are two.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” Eph 2:8-9

“That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Rom 10:9-10

What if you obey first, second and third but not forth, laying on of hands are you still lost?

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

AOF 3 says, you must obey the following to be saved ,AOF 4: "We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost."
But in the New Testament, obviously written before your AOF we have many verses that don't agree, here are two.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” Eph 2:8-9

“That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Rom 10:9-10

Please.... Even you don't believe in this Modern heretical Faith Alone nonsense... Otherwise you wouldn't of created this thread telling us salvation exists within the Protestant 66 books. To hold true to your Faith Alone beliefs you should be telling us that the Bible in any form or version is not needed for salvation.

Originally Posted by disciple

What if you obey first, second and third but not forth, laying on of hands are you still lost?

Yes..... Even you will agree that without receiving the Holy Ghost you can not be saved.
But then once again I ask... What does it matter to you?
You believe Faith in Christ is all that is required...
We believe Faith in Christ is required, and obedience is also required...

Seems to me as a Mormon I have both bases covered... So what are you complaining about???
I'm saved according to both your theology and mine.

[disciple]

Originally Posted by theway

Please.... Even you don't believe in this Modern heretical Faith Alone nonsense... Otherwise you wouldn't of created this thread telling us salvation exists within the Protestant 66 books. To hold true to your Faith Alone beliefs you should be telling us that the Bible in any form or version is not needed for salvation.

Yes..... Even you will agree that without receiving the Holy Ghost you can not be saved.
But then once again I ask... What does it matter to you?
You believe Faith in Christ is all that is required...
We believe Faith in Christ is required, and obedience is also required...

Seems to me as a Mormon I have both bases covered... So what are you complaining about???
I'm saved according to both your theology and mine.

Way, I'm sorry you are so thoroughly deceived.

[theway]

Originally Posted by disciple

Way, I'm sorry you are so thoroughly deceived.

Im sorry... Deceived in what way???
Please show where my ***essment of your beliefs is incorrect?