My clarification is better than YOURS!...how can one argue with such LOGIC?....UNLESS LOGIC comes from the OTHER SIDE!
~”Then you HAVE to retract your constant saying that GOD commanded him to do it. It is false.”~
Why? I have teachings at my disposal that you don’t accept. Therefore, I believe it’s true.
This is an example of why we believe modern revelation to be necessary. Points such as the apparent “Abrahamic adultery” conflict are cleared up.
The counter-argument, of course, is that Smith made it all up to cover his own sins. If you don’t believe he was a valid prophet, then this is a logical conclusion.
Since I accept Smith as a prophet, I have the benefit of a great deal of clarification. The Bible is not a complete record. There is spiritual truth to be found outside its pages.
I suppose as long as we disagree on that, we will not find common ground on this topic.
My clarification is better than YOURS!...how can one argue with such LOGIC?....UNLESS LOGIC comes from the OTHER SIDE!
Very true - you DO have 'teachings'; you just have no SCRIPTURE that backs it up.
Just like your temple rites: plenty of 'tradition' (that changes) but no SCRIPTURE that you can point to that authorizes them.
Or you have been misled.
We Christian also believe that Smith, etal, are prophets, too, and come to a different conclusion.
We also agree in these points.
BUT, if anything DISAGREES with the Bible, or a modern interpretation of it, it had better be REALLY certifiable.
BUT, if anything DISAGREES with the Bible, or if a modern interpretation of it changes what has been accepted CANON for centuries, it had better be REALLY certifiable.