First of all, let me say I know very little about all of the in’s and out’s of the LDS scripture.
If I understand correcly, LDS use the Bible (KJV or JST), Doctrines and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and the Book of Abraham.
Also, if I understand correctly, you refer to the King Follett Discourse for “guidance”, but it isn’t part of your cannonized scripture.
Now, with that being said, I ran across an interesting article:
I am having trouble with some of the things quoted in the article.
“Third, how the Book of Abraham was translated is unimportant. The Church does not stand or fall on the Book of Abraham.”
“Now where is the Book of Abraham in this?” he asked. “It isn’t. The Book of Abraham is not central to the restored gospel of Christ.”
How can someone in this position, and apparently backed by LDS leadership (It is on and LDS website after all) say that something that is considered canonized scripture by the LDS, not be “central” in your beliefs, and basically defend only a small portion of it?
I’m just confused on this. As a Catholic, we believe ALL scripture is central to our beliefs, and all scripture should be defended.
I’m not looking for a fight with this, I am just truly trying to understand the reasoning.