An interesting approach to the Book of Mormon

This person says that Joseph Smith was only called to translate the Book of Mormon and nothing more based on Book of Commandments:

And you have a gift to translate the plates; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift for I will grant unto you no other gift. (Book of Commandments IV:2)

I believe the Church of Christ Temple Lot and the Church of Jesus Christ in Pennsylvania take this approach…neither of them use the BoC or D&C

Indeed. That passage was rewritten for the 1835 edition of the Doctrine & Covenants.


If Joseph Smith was given the instruction to translate the Book of Mormon, then Joseph Smith was given the keys of revelation by God. If so, then how does one decide which revelation is of God and which one isn’t?

So, Joseph Smith says “God told me to give the Book of Mormon to the World”, then he says, “God gave me the Priesthood blessing (a.k.a. apostolic keys) to lead his church”.

Now, who gets to decide that one is true while the other isn’t?

Yeah, that article is kinda hard to grasp. Even for one who is non-LDS.

From what I understand…the two branches I mentioned tend to view Joseph as a “fallen prophet”…he got too full of himself after he translated the BoM…that’s why the BoC and D&C are not part of their standard works…they are not trustworthy as revelations…the Church of Christ Temple Lot at one time used the BoC…but I believe that has been discontinued…they do publish a book outlining all the changes to the revelations between when the BoC was compiled and the D&C was published.

That’s what I’m trying to say… Who gets to decide that the prophet fell?

Okay, let me rephrase in Catholic terms… Who gets to decide that the pope lost favor with God?


The articles show that a person will find whatever way to justify their own choices and beliefs that makes sense to them, and they will often do so by ignoring the Biblical prophecies that are so abundant about a falling away and a restoration and the importance of divinely authorized keys. A reformation could not do the same thing that a restoration could do unless it led to a true restoration, and the Bible did not prophesy about a reformation per se, but about a restoration through an angel from the presence of God.

Hmmmm. This thread should be very interesting. :thumbsup:

God. And God would deal with the issue, in a very visible way…I will give you 3 guesses what would happen to a Pope if he erred on either doctrines or dogma. If a prophet falls and is found to be false, The people in the O.T. were instructed very clearly on how to deal with such a person. This however does not happen today. Peace :slight_smile:

I’m sure there’s been many prophets who came along who simply didn’t measure up to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the minor prophets, who by no means were minor when you consider Daniel.

Now the Popes, thats an interesting story in itself. There have been some very colorful individuals their.

And of course Joe Smith is no slouch either. Well he just walked out in the woods and found the Angel Moroni and the Golden Tablets:thumbsup: Or visa-versa?

Hey Gary. Im going walking through the desert later. Wonder if I will find anything interesting too! :thumbsup: besides snakes and scorpions…:frowning:


And that’s what’s missing in that article.

Hey Jethro. I’m taking your sheep near those mountains yonder. Wonder if I’ll find anything interesting besides that bush… :thumbsup:

You guys are funny.

That doesn’t seem to be what Joseph Smith’s original revelations taught until they were changed (seemingly at the behest of Sidney Rigdon of all people).

Reason gets to decide.

  1. Joseph Smith claims God gave him one job and one job only.
  2. Joseph Smith claims God gave him another job.
    If one is true, then two is false. Joseph Smith either lied about his first claim, his second claim, or both. Joseph Smith was either never a prophet, or a fallen prophet.

We have had several Popes who I am sure lost favor with God. But none of them spoke ex cathedra, bringing error into Catholic doctrine. It is the office of the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome, when speaking from the official “chair of Peter” that is protected from error.

Which coincided with the invention of Mormon Apostles.

:rotfl::clapping: Yours is even better Pinay! You made my Army day. You do know I have a soft spot and a great love for my Mormon friends. Peace and prayers for you and yours. I hope you took no offence. If you did, I know some great Catholic jokes I can p.m. you. :slight_smile:

Sources please.

Because neither 1 nor 2 is true.

The link in post #1 shows how they are true

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit