This is a continuation of a four-part study. To start at the beginning of the study, click here.
The Book of Mormon in Mosiah 18:8-30 (note vv 16-18) describes the beginning of the church in America. V17 says "And they were called the church of God, or the church of Christ, from that time forward." The footnote says this was "about B.C. 147."
Mosiah 23:16 says "Alma was their high priest, he being the founder of their church."
So the Book of Mormon says the "church of Christ" was founded by Alma in America in 147 BC.
The Bible teaches that the church did not exist until after Jesus died, and that Jesus was the founder of the church.
Matthew 16:18 - During His public ministry Jesus promised, "I will build my church." It did not exist then (let alone in 147 BC). But when it did begin, Jesus would be its founder.
Acts 20:28 - Jesus purchased the church with His blood. So, it could not be His church till after He died.
Ephesians 1:20-23 - Christ is the Head of His church, which is His body. But He did not become Head till after His resurrection (v20). Hence, the church could not function before then, else it would have been a headless body.
1 Corinthians 3:11; Ephesians 2:20 - Jesus is the foundation, the chief cornerstone on which the church is built. The church could not exist, and people could not become part of it, until the foundation had been laid (Eph. 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:4-8). But Christ did not become the chief cornerstone till after He had been rejected and killed (1 Peter 2:4-8; Acts 4:10,11).
So the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible about when the church began and who founded it. If any church existed in America in 147 BC, it could not have been the church of Christ. It would have existed 180 years too early to be Jesus' church. It would have had the wrong founder. It could not have belonged to Jesus because He had not yet paid for it. It would have been a building without a foundation and a body without a head.
The Book of Mormon in Alma 46:13-16 (note v15) says that in America, "all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians, as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come." Obviously, this was supposed to have occurred before Christ came. The footnote says this occurred in B.C. 73.
Acts 11:26 says, "And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." So, the first use of the term "Christian" occurred in Antioch, many years after Jesus' death. The Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible in both time and place, for it says the term was used over 100 years earlier in America.
The Book of Mormon has people teaching and practicing the gospel steps to salvation in America years before those doctrines were revealed in the Bible.
2 Nephi 9:23,24 - The necessity of belief in Christ, repentance, and baptism in His name was taught. The footnote says this was "Between B.C. 559 and 545."
2 Nephi 30:2 - About the same time it was expressly stated that Gentiles who repent would be God's covenant people, and Jews who do not would be rejected.
2 Nephi 31:5,11-14,17 - Also about the same time is found an express description of baptism in water, in the Holy Spirit, and in fire.
Mosiah 4:2 - Men cried out for the atoning blood of Christ to forgive their sins (about 124 BC). As a result, they received a remission of sins (v3).
Mosiah 18:10-17 - Alma baptized people in water in the name of the Lord, so they were added to the church (about 147 BC).
Alma 39:15-19 - Alma clearly taught the gospel (note vv 15-18). When people "marvel why these things should be known so long beforehand," Alma replied, "Is it not as necessary that the plan of redemption should be made known unto this people as well as unto their children?" We are told that it is as easy for God to reveal these things at that time "as after the time of his coming." (Footnote: About B.C. 73) [Cf. 1 Nephi 10:19]
Hence, the Book of Mormon has the entire plan of salvation, including baptism and forgiveness by Jesus' blood, taught and actively practiced hundreds of years before Jesus died to shed His blood. And using the reasoning of Alma 39, logically the plan should have been known and practiced in every generation since Adam!
The Bible states that these doctrines were not clearly revealed before the life of Christ.
Matthew 13:17 - Jesus said that many prophets and righteous men desired to see and hear those things that He taught His disciples, but had not seen nor heard them.
1 Peter 1:10-12 says salvation was not ministered to Old Testament prophets. They predicted it, but did not understand it or participate in it.
Luke 24:47 - After His resurrection, Jesus said repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name beginning at Jerusalem. Yet the Book of Mormon has this being preached long before Jesus said it would begin, and in a completely different place (America).
Ephesians 3:3-6,9,10 - In Paul's day the gospel was revealed to the apostles and prophets, but in other ages it was not made known to the sons of men. This mystery had been hid in Christ. This hidden mystery included the fact that Gentiles would be redeemed by the gospel. Yet the Book of Mormon has all this made known long before the time the Bible says it was revealed. [Note Rom. 16:25,26; 1 Cor. 2:7-10; Col. 1:25,26.]
Romans 6:3 - As many as are baptized into Christ are baptized into His death. It would therefore have been impossible to practice gospel baptism prior to Jesus' death.
Hebrews 9:16,17 - A testament is of force only after the death of the testator. But baptism, the church, and forgiveness by Jesus' death are all part of His New Testament. Therefore, none of them could have been in effect before He died.
Again the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible, because it has many aspects of salvation being practiced long before they were truly in effect. Of course, it would be easy for Joseph Smith to include these things in the Book of Mormon, if in fact it was first written in his own day, rather than many centuries earlier as he claimed it had been.
Doctrine and Covenants 107:65,91,92 (cf. 28:6) says that the Mormon Church has a prophet who serves as President and head of the church, presiding over the whole church like Moses.
Ephesians 1:22,23 - Jesus is Head over all things to His church. What does this leave for a man to be head over? If a church has a human head who presides over the whole church, how can it be Jesus' church?
Ephesians 5:22,23 - Christ is head of the church as a husband is head of his wife, and He is the Savior of the body. Does a body have more than one head? Does the church have more than one Savior? Can a wife be subject to more than one husband? If not, then no one but Jesus can serve as head or preside over His church.
2 Corinthians 11:5; 12:11 - Paul was not a whit behind the chiefest apostle. Like Catholics, Mormons say Peter was the first head of the church. If so, then Paul was also head of the church, for he was not a whit behind Peter. That would make two human heads for the church!
The Mormon Church claims to have restored the true New Testament church. One of its major arguments to prove this is that it has restored the organization of the church. But where does the New Testament mention a "president" or human head who presides over the whole church?
Mormonism has not restored Bible teaching but has again contradicted it.
Doctrine and Covenants 107:7,13,15 distinguishes "elders" from "bishops." In the Mormon Church these are two separate offices in two separate priesthoods. While a man may hold both offices, the fact is that many elders are not bishops. An elder and a bishop are two separate offices.
"Elders" in the Mormon Church are often young, unmarried men, who have no children.
In the Mormon Church, males can become "deacons" as young as 12 years of age.
Titus 1:5,6 says, in order to be appointed an elder, one must be "the husband of one wife" and must have children. Many Mormon "elders" do not fit the Bible qualifications. (Cf. 1 Tim. 3:2,4.)
1 Peter 5:1,2 - "Elders" (v1) are to "serve as overseers" of the flock (v2). "Overseers" is the verb form of the Greek word for "bishop." So elders do the work of bishops.
Acts 20:17,28 - Paul told the "elders" at Ephesus that they were "overseers" of the flock. "Overseers" is sometimes here translated "bishops" (ASV) and is the same word elsewhere translated "bishop" (cf. Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1; etc.). So elders are bishops.
Titus 1:5-7ff - Paul said elders must have the qualifications of bishops. This makes sense only if both terms refer to the same office.
1 Timothy 3:8-12 - Deacons should be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. Are all twelve-year-old Mormon "deacons" "husbands of one wife? Do they rule their children and their houses well?
Again, Mormon teaching clearly contradicts Bible teaching.
Doctrine and Covenants 107 - Sometime after they become Christians, males who meet special qualifications can become priests by being specially ordained. Some become high priests. Only special priests have the authority to baptize. Formerly black people could not serve in the priesthood, but that doctrine was changed in relatively recent times. (See also Marvelous Work and a Wonder, p. 91f.)
Each of these priesthoods contain many men (Doctrine and Covenants 107:1). Smith was granted both priesthoods - Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith, 2:69-72. The priesthood had to be restored to Smith so men could receive authority to baptize and so restore the church.
Since they believe that Smith had to have authority to restore the priesthood in order to restore the church, it follows that the Mormon doctrine of priesthood is fundamental to their claim to be the true church. If the Mormon teaching about priesthood is in error, the whole foundation of their church and their doctrinal system falls.
The Old Testament had a special priesthood, but in the New Testament all Christians priests.
1 Peter 2:5,9 - You are a holy priesthood. To whom does this refer? It is those who: are elect according to Jesus' blood (1:1,2), have faith unto salvation and will receive the inheritance of heaven (1:3-5,9), are obedient children of the Father (1:14-17), are redeemed by Jesus' blood (1:18-21), are born again, having purified their souls by obeying the truth (1:22-25), make up God's spiritual house (2:5) which is the church (1 Tim. 3:15), believe in Christ (2:7), are called from darkness to light to be God's special people (2:9,10).
Revelation 1:5,6; 5:9,10 - Those who are washed from their sins in Jesus' blood and redeemed by His blood have been made priests.
Romans 12:1; Hebrews 13:15 - All Christians offer sacrifices to God.
So, the New Testament teaches that all Christians are priests. Where does it teach the concept of a special priesthood that includes some Christians but not all Christians?
Only fleshly descendants of Aaron could be priests after the order of Aaron.
Any others who tried to serve as priests should be put to death - Numbers 3:10; 16:39,40; 2 Chron. 26:16-18.
Even Jesus could not serve as priest according to the law of Moses, because He was of the tribe of Judah. He could serve as priest only after the law changed - Hebrews 7:11-14.
Joseph Smith himself later said in Doctrine and Covenants 107:13-16 that a man cannot be a bishop in the priesthood of Aaron unless he be a "literal descendant of Aaron."
Are all Mormon Aaronic priests descendants of Aaron of the tribe of Levi? Mormons claim Joseph Smith was of the tribe of Joseph, so how could he have the Aaronic priesthood? If the Aaronic priesthood is still in existence, then Mormon priests are not of the proper ancestry and therefore would deserve death!
The Aaronic priesthood ceased when Jesus died and the law was changed.
Hebrews 8:3; 5:1 - The work of priests was to offer animal sacrifices. [7:27; 10:11]
Hebrews 10:1-14 - Animal sacrifices ceased when Jesus died, because they are no longer needed.
Hebrews 7:12 - In order for Jesus to serve as priest, the whole law was changed.
Many other Scriptures show that, when Jesus died, the whole Old Testament law was removed, including the Aaronic priesthood. Hence, there is no such thing as an Aaronic priesthood with God's approval today. See Hebrews 8:6-13; 9:1-4; 2 Corinthians 3:6-11; Galatians 3:24,25; 5:1-6; Romans 7:1-7; Ephesians 2:11-16; Colossians 2:13-17.
Hebrews 5:1-6 - Jesus was ordained High Priest, after the order of Melchizedek, by a special promise addressed to Him as God's begotten Son (v5).
Hebrews 7:20-25 - Old Testament priests had successors, because they died. Jesus continues as our priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek, having an unchanging priesthood. Hence, He has no successors.
We need no priest but Jesus between God and us (1 Tim. 2:5). He is our only High Priest, and all Christians are priests below Him. To claim some other high priest today is to exalt men to the position the Bible says belongs only to Jesus.
The Mormon claim to be the true church rests on their claim to have authority in their priesthood. However, we have shown that their priesthood clearly violates the Scriptures. Therefore, the Mormon Church is not the true church.
Ephesians 2:20 - The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. Mormons say this means apostles and prophets must be living on earth in order for the true church to exist (Article of Faith #6).
They claim that any church which does not have apostles living on earth cannot be the true church. In order to restore the church in the 1800's, Joseph Smith had to appoint 12 apostles. When any apostle dies, the Mormon Church replaces him.
Doctrine and Covenants 7:1-3 says John the apostle was given power to live (not die), tarry, prophesy, and bring souls to Jesus till Jesus comes in glory.
The Book of Mormon in 3 Nephi 28 says Jesus chose 12 "disciples" in America exactly like the 12 apostles in the Bible. They could teach by inspiration, baptize, give the Holy Spirit, etc.
Of these 12 American disciples, three were given power like John to "never taste of death" (vv 6,7). They would never die but would live in the flesh till Jesus comes again (vv 7,8,38,40,25). Jails, fire, and wild animals could not hold or harm them (vv 19-22). They would bring the souls of men to Jesus while the earth shall stand (v9).
True apostles must be eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ.
Acts 1:21,22 - The only time that the Bible records a successor was chosen to an apostle, he had to be an eyewitness of Christ's resurrection. [26:16; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8]
1 Corinthians 15:8 - Paul also witnessed Jesus, but he was exceptional ("last of all ... born out of due time") in that He witnessed Jesus after He had ascended.
Mormon apostles do not generally claim to be eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. If they did, they would all be like Paul; but that would make them the rule, not the exception.
True apostles must do the signs of an apostle.
2 Corinthians 12:11,12 - Apostles proved that God had sent them by means of the signs of an apostle, which are "signs, wonders, and mighty deeds." The primary purpose of miracles has always been to confirm who God is and who His messengers are. See Mark 16:20; John 5:36; 20:30,31; Acts 2:22; 14:3; Hebrews 2:3,4; 1 Kings 18:36-39; Exodus 4:1-9; 7:3-5; 14:30,31.
Mormon apostles do not do miracles to prove their qualifications (it is claimed that some have this ability, but they do not do them voluntarily and publicly to prove their apostleship as New Testament apostles did).
If a church must have apostles living on earth in order to be Jesus' true church, then the Mormon Church is not Jesus' true church, since its apostles do not have the qualifications of true apostles.
Ephesians 2:20 - The work of the apostles pertained to the foundation of the church, but Jesus is the chief cornerstone. Must Jesus be living on earth in order for the church to exist? Obviously not, so why must we have apostles and prophets living on earth in order for the church to exist? We no more need apostles living on earth today than we need Jesus living on earth today.
Luke 16:29-31 - We "have" apostles and prophets in the church today like the Jews in Jesus' day "had" Moses and the prophets. We have the written word, which is the result of the work they did.
Apostles and prophets were needed at the beginning of the church, but no Scripture says they need to continue living on earth in order for the church to exist. On the contrary, Scripture teaches that apostles must be eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. So no one today qualifies. The work of apostles was to reveal and confirm God's word. This work was completed in the first century and is no longer needed (John 16:13; 1 Corinthians 13:8-11; Jude 3; 2 Timothy 3:16,17; John 20:30,31; James 1:25).
Jesus' church today has no living apostles, because it needs no living apostles.
Why didn't the true church exist before Smith "restored" it?
Mormonism claims that the church was completely removed from the earth because of apostasy. In his first revelation from God, Smith is supposed to have asked God "which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join." He was told "join none of them, for they are all wrong" - Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith 2:18,19. Smith was eventually led to "restore" the LDS church.
But if four apostle/disciples were on earth bringing souls to Christ while the world stands, where were all the souls they converted? Surely the four themselves would have been in the church on earth. So how can it be that the church was completely removed from the earth? Why didn't the church exist before Smith "restored" it? It cannot be said that no one in Smith's day was receptive to the truth, for hundreds accepted his message when he preached it. Why hadn't they already received the message of the four apostle/disciples?
Why did God have to give Smith revelations in order to restore the church?
We are told that, in order to restore the truth, the priesthood, and the church, Smith had revelations and messages from the Father and Son, Moroni, John the Baptist, etc. Why go through all this, if four apostle/disciples were already on earth?
These four men were supposed to have the truth and priesthood authority to baptize, etc., till Jesus returns. Why not just send these men to Smith? In fact, why was Smith needed at all, since these four men were clearly more experienced and qualified than Smith to teach, baptize, etc.?
Why does the Mormon Church ordain a successor for the apostle John? And does it replace the missing American disciples?
The Mormon Church says it must have 12 apostles living on earth, so they replace them as they die. The fact these men die proves that the apostle John is not among them, since he cannot die. But if John is still alive, that makes 13 apostles on the earth, rather than 12.
Further, the Book of Mormon in 4 Nephi 1:14 says the original twelve American disciples died and were replaced by other men, except for the three who were to tarry on earth. Does the Mormon Church today choose replacements for the American disciples as they die, like the Book of Mormon says, and like they replace the 12 New Testament apostles? If so, do they replace only nine of the 12, like the Book of Mormon says, since there are still three living on earth?
Furthermore, if the three American disciples were not to be replaced because they continued to live, then the same should be true of John the apostle. No successors should be chosen for him, since he is living on earth. But the fact is that all twelve Mormon apostles are men who die and are replaced. Hence, the Mormon Church is replacing John! And either they are not replacing the missing nine American disciples at all, or else they are replacing the three who should not be replaced!
Anyway you count, the Mormon Church has either too many apostles or too few. They are not following the Bible or the Book of Mormon! They are replacing men they should not be, and they are failing to replace men they should be!
If the church must follow the teaching of God about apostles in order to be the true church, then the Mormon Church cannot be the true church. They are not following either the Bible or the Book of Mormon regarding apostles!
[Note: In John 21:21-23 Jesus clarified that He was not saying John would live till Jesus returned. He was only telling Peter this was none of his affair.]
Smith in Doctrine and Covenants 89:5,6 said regarding the Lord's supper: "...to offer up your sacraments before him ... this should be wine." [See also 3 Nephi 18:1-9; Moroni 5.]
However, he also said in Doctrine and Covenants 27:2 that it does not matter what substance is used.
The Mormon Church today uses water in the communion.
Matthew 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18 - Jesus clearly taught that the element used in the Lord's supper should be "fruit of the vine."
Once again the Mormon Church teaches and practices different from the Lord's instructions.
Mormons, of course, have historically practiced polygamy, though they do not openly practice it now because it is illegal. Consider their teaching.
Jacob 1:15 - The Nephites indulged in "wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon..."
Jacob 2:23,24,27 - "Grosser crimes" included whoredoms like David, etc. "Behold David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was an abomination before me, saith the Lord." "...hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not be any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none." (Cf. 3:5; Doctrine and Covenants 49:16; 42:22.)
Hence, the Book of Mormon explicitly condemned polygamy, quite specifically the polygamy of David and Solomon.
Doctrine and Covenants 132 condones polygamy as an everlasting covenant which, if men reject, they will be damned (vv 4,6,55,61f)! Hence, the writer of the book of Jacob will be damned, along with everyone who believes what he wrote in the Book of Mormon!
Specifically, Smith then justified David and Solomon, saying that God said: "David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon ... and in nothing did they sin ... David's wives and concubines were given unto him by me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant ... and in none of those things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife..." - 132:38,39.
So in the Book of Mormon Smith has the Lord saying that David and Solomon's many wives and concubines were an abomination to the Lord. But later in Doctrine and Covenants Smith has the Lord saying that David and Solomon's many wives were given to them by the Lord, and in nothing did they sin! Believe it who can!
The New Testament expressly condemns plural wives.
Matthew 19:3-9 - Jesus condemned divorce and remarriage as being adultery. He said God from the beginning intended for one man to be joined to one woman. Subsequent marriages would be adultery. Under the law, Moses had allowed plural wives because of the hardness of the people's hearts. But Jesus no longer allows this. (Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 5:31)
Romans 7:2,3 - Man and woman are joined for life. Marriage to another partner while the first one lives is adultery.
Titus 1:5-7; 1 Timothy 3:2,12 - Specifically elders (bishops) and deacons must be husbands of one wife! Interestingly, these are the very people that Mormons believed ought to have more than one wife.
Once again, Smith's revelations contradict both themselves and the Bible.
1 Nephi 13:40 - The Book of Mormon claims that it will make known certain "plain and precious things which have been taken away" from the Bible.
Doctrine and Covenants 27:5; 35:12; 20:14,15 - The Bible alone will not save if one rejects the Book of Mormon!
Mormons will often try to cite Bible teachings to try to confirm the Book of Mormon and the Mormon Church. But, when people point out the contradictions between Mormon "Scriptures" and the Bible, then Mormons began to claim there are errors in the Bible!
1 Nephi 1:3; Jacob 1:2; Ether 5:1 - It was written according to man's knowledge, to the best of their memory.
1 Nephi 19:6 - If the writer did err, he would excuse himself because of the weakness of the flesh.
3 Nephi 23:6-13 - Jesus rebuked Nephi for omitting something from the record which he should have included!
Mormon 8:12,17 - If there are faults in the record, it is the fault of men, but don't condemn the book anyway, even if it has faults, or you'll be in danger of hell fire!
Mormon 9:30-34 - Don't condemn the writers of the Book of Mormon for the imperfections of their record. If they could have written in Hebrew, there would have been no imperfection; but they couldn't because the plates weren't big enough!
The Bible claims it is from God.
2 Timothy 3:16,17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Galatians 1:11,12; 1 Corinthians 14:37. (See also Eph. 3:3-5; Luke 10:16; 2 Peter 1:20,21.)
The Bible claims its very words were revealed from God.
1 Corinthians 2:10-13 - The Spirit guided men so they received, not just the ideas from God, but also the words from God.
Deuteronomy 18:18,19 - God put His words in the prophet's mouth, so the prophet spoke (or wrote) the very words chosen by God Himself.
So whereas Book of Mormon writers wrote from their own memory what they thought was sacred, the Bible writers wrote only what God revealed in words that God Himself guided.
(See 1 Cor. 2:3-5; Matt. 10:19,20; 2 Sam. 23:1,2; Ex. 24:3,4,7; Isa. 51:l6; Jer. 1:5-9.)
It follows that the Bible is infallible.
The message in the Bible cannot possibly be wrong because God does not make mistakes.
Psalm 119:128 - God's word is always true and right.
Titus 1:2 - God cannot lie or be wrong.
Matthew 22:32 - The Scriptures are so accurate that we can rely even on the tense of the verbs. [Galatians 3:16]
(Cf. John 17:17; Psalm 33:4; 19:8; 147:4,5; Rom. 3:4; Job 37:16; Num. 23:19; Heb. 6:18; Deut. 18:20-22).
The Bible claims God would preserve it so it could not be destroyed.
Psalms 119:160 - The entirety of Your word is truth, and every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever. [Cf. v152.]
Isaiah 40:8 - The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.
Isaiah 30:8 - Now go, write it before them on a tablet, and note it on a scroll, that it may be for time to come, forever and ever.
2 John 2 - The truth abides in us and will be with us forever.
1 Peter 1:23-25 - Like the Old Testament, the gospel will not wither and fade like grass, but will stand forever. [2 Peter 1:12-15; 2 Timothy 3:16,17]
So, the Book of Mormon admits that it contains imperfections and errors due to the weakness of the flesh and the language in which it was written. Yet, the Bible writers said that, in what they wrote, every word is exactly right and true, and God would preserve it for future generations.
For more information go to our Bible Instruction web site at /instruct/ and study the article on the preservation of the Bible.
Remember, Mormons claim to believe the Bible, yet they also claim the Bible contains errors and omissions. The Bible, however, admits no errors but claims infallibility.
Then Mormonism says that the errors in the Bible were corrected by a book that admits it contains errors and imperfections!
Mormons say the Bible (the Old Testament in particular) omits "plain and precious things." Yet Jesus repeatedly quoted the Old Testament, citing it as Divine authority, but never implied anything was wrong with it. No Bible prophet ever acknowledged the existence of any error in the Bible. But the Book of Mormon acknowledges that Jesus rebuked a Book of Mormon writer for omitting what should have been included. So the "precious things" supposedly omitted from the Bible are supposedly corrected by a book that admits its authors omitted things!
The Book of Mormon says it would contain no errors if it could have been written in Hebrew. Then Mormons say there are many things missing from the Old Testament. But the OT was written in Hebrew! If Book of Mormon writers would have made no errors had they written in Hebrew, since the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, how could it have errors?
Mormons claim that the Catholic Church removed important teachings from the Bible. This 0claim is made with absolutely no textual evidence. We have ancient copies of the Scriptures from before the time of the Catholic Church, and they confirm what we have in our Bibles today.
Yet, the Bible repeatedly condemns Catholic doctrine, just like it does Mormon doctrine. In fact, Mormonism and Catholicism are often condemned for the very same errors! If Catholics changed the Bible, why did they leave in it so many things that condemn their own practice?
So Mormonism tells us we cannot trust just the Bible because it contains errors, whereas the Bible itself says it contains no errors. Then they tell us that, instead of the Bible, we should place our trust in their book, that openly admits it contains errors! Then they tell us, if we reject their book for its errors and try to follow only the book that claims it has no errors, that we will be condemned! Believe it who can
To continue with the next part of this study of Mormonism, click here.
To start at the beginning of the study, click here.
Copyright 1998, 2007, David E. Pratte
Local churches and individuals may, within limits, distribute this Bible study guide for free, but not for sale. Web sites may link to this page but not reproduce it. For details click here for our copyright guidelines.
|Bible Courses, Commentaries, Class Books | Blog | Contact Us|
|Audio Bible study recordings | Bible Articles by Email|
Links from other web sites to this page or to our
home page are welcome and encouraged:
www.gospelway.com The Gospel Way: Free Bible Study Online Materials & Guides
Scripture quotations are generally from the New King James Version (NKJV), copyright 1982, 1988 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. used by permission. All rights reserved.