Difference between revisions of "The Bible/Completeness"

m (Printed material)
m
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
==Response==  
 
==Response==  
 +
{{BiblePortal}}
 
The Bible nowhere makes the claim for sufficiency or completeness.
 
The Bible nowhere makes the claim for sufficiency or completeness.
  

Revision as of 21:02, 22 October 2006

Answers portal
Early Christianity &
Apostasy
Gutenberg detail1.jpg
Resources.icon.tiny.1.png    RESOURCES

Apostasy


Authority: and Priesthood


Doctrinal shift:

Perspectives.icon.tiny.1.png    PERSPECTIVES
Media.icon.tiny.1.png    MEDIA
Resources.icon.tiny.1.png    OTHER PORTALS

Criticism

Critics claim the Bible contains all necessary or essential knowledge to assure salvation. Therefore, things like modern prophets or additional scripture (such as the Book of Mormon) are unnecessary or even blasphemous.

Response

Answers portal
Holy Bible
BibleMiniature1.jpg
Resources.icon.tiny.1.png    RESOURCES




Book of Mormon & Bible:

Perspectives.icon.tiny.1.png    PERSPECTIVES
Media.icon.tiny.1.png    MEDIA
Resources.icon.tiny.1.png    OTHER PORTALS

The Bible nowhere makes the claim for sufficiency or completeness.

Furthermore, the thousands of Christian sects and groups provide ample testimony that the Bible has not been sufficient to encourage unanimity among Christians about proper authority, doctrine, or practice. Critics would like us to accept that their reading is the correct one, but this means we must appeal to some other standard—one cannot use their reading of the Bible to prove their reading of the Bible!

There is also no unanimity among Christians concerning what constitutes the "true" Bible canon—once again, some other standard is needed to determine which Bible is the "true" or "inerrant" version.

There are also other writings which the Bible itself refers to as authoritative, and yet these books are not in the present Bible canon. Either the Bible is wrong in referring to these writings as authoritative, or some modern Christians are wrong for arguing that the Bible is a complete record of all God's word to His children.

While the LDS do not like to denigrate the Bible or call attention to its errors, since they consider it an inspired volume of scripture of great value, they also recognize that there are some errors and contradictions in the Bible which are the result of human error or tampering. This does not reduce the Bible's value in their estimation, but it does call into question any claims for "inerrancy."

George Q. Cannon:

This book [the Bible] is of priceless worth; its value cannot estimated by anything that is known among men upon which value is fixed.... To the Latter-day Saints it should always be a precious treasure. Beyond any people now upon the face of the earth, they should value it, for the reason that from its pages, from the doctrines set f by its writers, the epitome of the plan of salvation which is there given to us, we derive the highest consolation, we obtain the greatest strength. It is, as it were, a constant fountain sending forth streams of living life to satisfy the souls of all who peruse its pages.
∗       ∗       ∗
We are not called to teach the errors of translators but the truth of God's word. It is our mission to develop faith in the revelations from God in the hearts of the children, and "How can that best be done?" is the question that confronts us. Certainly not by emphasizing doubts, creating difficulties or teaching negations.... The clause in the Articles of Faith regarding mistakes in the translation of the Bible was never intended to encourage us to spend our time in searching out and studying those errors, but to emphasize the idea that it is the truth and the truth only that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts, no matter where it is found.[1]

Conclusion

In sum, claiming inerrancy and completeness:

  • is not a Biblical doctrine
  • has not been sufficient to prevent a vast range of Biblical interpretations and Christian practices, all of which cannot be correct
  • ignores that the Biblical canon is not unanimous among Christians, and ignores non-canonical books which the Bible itself cites as being authoritative
  • ignores that the Bible contains some errors and internal inconsistencies

Endnotes

  1. [note] George Q. Cannon, "The Blessings Enjoyed Through Possessing The Ancient Records, etc.," Journal of Discourses, reported by Geo. F. Gibbs, John Irvine, and others, (8 May 1881), Vol. 22 (London: Latter-day Saint's Book Depot, 1882), 261–262.off-site

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

Template:BibleWiki

FAIR web site

FAIR Holy Bible materials
  • John A. Tvedtnes, "The Bible Code and Biblical Inerrancy," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR) FAIR link

External links

  • Robert A. Cloward, "Lost Scriptures," in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow, (New York, Macmillan Publishing, 1992), 2:845–846.off-site
  • Blake T. Ostler, "Bridging the Gulf (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 103–177. off-site
  • Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, "Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity, (Provo, Utah: FARMS, no date). off-site
  • Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company, 1993). off-site FAIR link direct off-site
On-line Holy Bible materials
  • Alma Allred, "Coin of the Realm: Beware of Specious Specie (Review of: "Scripture," In The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism)," FARMS Review of Books 12/1 (2000): 137–174. off-site
  • Danel W. Bachman, "The Other Side of the Coin: A Source Review of Norman Geisler's Chapter (Review of: "Scripture," In The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism)," FARMS Review of Books 12/1 (2000): 175–214. off-site
  • John Gee, "The Old Testament as Reliable History, Review of On the Reliability of the Old Testament by Kenneth A. Kitchen," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 425–430. off-site wiki
  • William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson, "The Evangelical Is Our Brother (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 178–209. off-site
  • Blake T. Ostler, "Bridging the Gulf (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 103–177. off-site
  • Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, "Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity, (Provo, Utah: FARMS, no date). off-site
  • Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company, 1993). off-site FAIR linkoff-site
  • John A. Tvedtnes and Matthew Roper, "'A Bible! A Bible!' The Canon and Ongoing Revelation (Review of Luke P. Wilson's "Lost Books & Latter-Day Revelation: A Response to Mormon Views of the New Testament Canon")off-site

Printed material

Holy Bible print materials
  • Alan Denison & D.L. Barksdale, Guess Who Wants To Have You For Lunch?, 2nd edition, (Redding, California: FAIR, 2002[1999]), 37–57. ISBN 1893036057. FAIR link
  • Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 2nd Rev edition (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2001[1999]), 1. ISBN {{{isbn}}}.
  • Leon Vaganay and Christian-Bernard Amphoux, An Introduction to New Testament Criticism, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 1. ISBN {{{isbn}}}.