Discrepancies and Why?

If God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, which the Bible states in Hebrews 13:8, then why would He write the Bible differently than the Book of Mormon? The Bible was written over hundreds of years by a multitude of different authors and then compiled and canonized. Why would He change that delivery to an angel delivering plates to a boy who translates the entire scripture?

Why would God hide the true testament of Christ for years then deliver it to some European? Even if it was waiting for America, then why wasn't it delivered even a hundred years earlier?

3 Nephi 7:27 in the Book of Mormon states, "That these sayings which ye shall write shall be kept and shalt be manifested unto the Gentiles, That through the fulness of the Gentiles, the remnant of their seed-which shall be scattered forth upon the face of the earth because of their unbelief-may be brought in, or may be brought to a knowledge of Me, their Redeemer." The issue with that is that if that was being done with the Book of Mormon then how come God sent the Bible out which was easily accessible to gentiles over a thousand years earlier? And why would God wait over a thousand years for the gentile Joseph Smith? Gentiles were plenty before that.

If you look at the point that the Bible was already available, how does the Book of Mormon bring the knowledge of the redeemer? It doesn't, the gentiles already had the knowledge of Christ. Unless the Book of Mormon speaks of a different Christ than the one in the Bible?

One more thing:

Galatians 1:6-9 (KJV) - "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel than that we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Rocky Foundation?

There is the idea in the Mormon church that the rock Jesus will build His church on is His doctrine and that if you go against this doctrine you will suffer destruction.

Wow. It seems so simple that at first glance it might be difficult to argue with. However, it is a sly ploy to keep you afraid and from arguing with the Mormon church. If you stop and think a moment, the Bible clearly spells out you will suffer destruction if you are not saved. So, thusly you will suffer destruction unless you follow the true way but it's not actually about the doctrine it's about the blood of Christ. You do not suffer destruction because you come against the doctrine of the Mormon church, in reality you suffer destruction because of your own sins.

That is why Jesus had to die because he was a perfect, lamb free of spot or blemish so His sacrifice was worthy. Thusly you could be forgiven because His sacrifice washes away your sin. That is the only way to heaven and what could keep you from heaven isn't doctrine necessarily but your own filthy sins that aren't under the blood of Christ. So in a way doctrine could keep you from heaven if you believe on a doctrine that causes you to believe you are okay without the blood of Christ, but your sin is the actual issue.

Also, if you read the verse in the Bible about how he builds the church it's not on doctrine. The verse in Matthew 16:16-18 says, "And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

There are two popular interpretations of this verse. One interpretation is that Jesus is actually saying he will build his church upon Peter, which seems doubtful as Peter is simply a human. It's also hard to compare him to a rock considering he denied Christ three times. Also, Jesus just got done saying he is blessed because the Father revealed unto him that Jesus was the Christ and if just that knowledge is a blessing it seems a leap for Jesus to suddenly go on to say the gates of hell won't prevail against a church founded on Peter. Besides the fact that if the Church was founded on Peter than we should worship Peter and we'd have a pretty weak foundation. Regardless, using this interpretation the Mormon church belief does not line up.

The other interpretation is that Jesus is referring to what Peter said as the foundation of the church, the proclamation, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Doctrinally that seems to make a lot more sense, plus if you read it that way then Christ is actually saying upon Himself He will build His church. God is referred to as the rock in Psalms 62:6 and Jesus is referred to as the chief cornerstone in Ephesians 2:20. This interpretation seems more likely the actual meaning. Regardless, it also does not line up with the Mormon teaching as Jesus is building His rock upon Himself, not the Mormon doctrine.

Questions for the Validity of Mormonism

Below I've listed several questions that bring forward the questionable validity of the mormon church. I feel these can be good questions to ask when looking at the mormon church and also Joseph Smith, the founder of the mormon church, and just mormonism in general.

*Smith was supposedly told during his vision not to join any church because current churches were false and he would bring forth the true church. However, 8 years after his supposed 1828 vision, he applied for membership in a Methodist church. Why would he do that?

*If the plates he got the book of mormon from actually existed, why couldn't they be here for everyone to see and believe?

*If there were so many Jews, etcetera that were 'lost sheep', stretching across the Americas, wouldn't they have had the same/similar language as the rest of the Jews? Think about history for a moment, Native Americans, Mesoamericans, etcetera, all had different languages and civilizations. And supposedly the language Joseph Smith translated was reformed Egyptian, why would these Jews use Egyptian when the rest of the Jews kept Hebrew?

*Joseph was a bit of a nut, a treasure hunter, he believed in things such as mystical or magical stones. In fact, he used a seer stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon. Why would God use sorcery to translate the word? (He wouldn't is the correct answer.)

*Joseph Smith claimed that six feet tall men lived on the moon and lived to be a thousand years old. Isn't it a little extreme to try to prove men never landed on the moon so you're religion isn't proven false? Shouldn't actual, in stone, proven scientific evidence support your beliefs, if they are in fact, true?

*Joseph Smith claimed that Jesus would return by 1891. How could a prophet of God be that far off?

*Where are the wheeled objects that should be in the Americas then since the Jews would have known of the wheel?

*If Joseph Smith was translating from a document that no one had seen before and the translation was given to him directly from God, why are the errors in translation as well the added words (the words in italics) that are in the King James Version of the Bible also in Joseph Smith's Book of Mormon? Maybe he wasn't hearing from the Lord but was actually copying from the Bible directly? God wouldn't give him an incorrect translation.

Quetzalcoatl Part 1

I am not sure how much information about Mormon beliefs everyone reading this will have but I will try to explain things as I go along. Please feel free to send me any questions you may have.

Mormons believe that the people from the book of Mormon were MesoAmericans. MesoAmericans basically lived in Mexico and southward toward South America. 

If you are a Christian, or honestly even if you are not, but have grown up in Western culture, I want you to think about something without blinders here. If you call someone an "ol' serpent" or a "dragon lady" what does that usually entail? Does it bring you warm, fuzzy feelings and make you think that person is a great person? Not typically, no. Actually, generally it typifies the devil, someone that can't be trusted, or someone that is mean and nasty. Even in the Bible, that term is generally referring to satan. Who deceived Eve? A serpent.

Mormons will try to explain this away with the serpent Moses lifted up in the wilderness to signify Jesus. 

Okay, let's hold on a moment and look at this. 

Here are some pictures of the typical idea of Quetzalcoatl. 

Here is an example of the typical idea of Moses in the wilderness. 

These do not seem like similar ideas in the least. 

In mythologies, serpents typically represented fertility or rebirth due to the nature of them shedding their skin and in a sense being reborn. Hermes staff can be used to symbolize healing, however Hermes is the god of merchants, weight, oratory, literature, athletics, and thieves. He also guided souls of the dead to the underworld. Not quite Christ like. 

There is the Kundalini, a form of serpent used in eastern religions and traditions. It is the indwelling spiritual energy living within us. It is a coiled up serpent that nourishes the tree of life within us. Sounds similar to the Eve story, doesn't it? This is also sometimes depicted similar to the picture of Hermes' staff.

There is ouroboros, a Greek, tail devouring serpent that represent cyclicality and eternal return. In Egypt it is used when Ra meets Osiris in the underworld and in the text two serpents coil around the head and feet of a god with their tails in their mouths and it represents the beginning and end of time. There is Mucalinda, the buddhist king of serpents. He has multiple heads and for the little available info that can be found on him, is far from Christ-like. 

To go even further, you can look at the fact that Quetzalcoatl isn't even a snake. No, he is a feathered serpent. 

When you think of feathered serpent, what do you think? Typically a dragon which is a symbol of satan. In the bible, the whore of babylon sits on a multi-headed dragon.

If you try extremely hard, you could possibly tie Quetzalcoatl to serpents and if you try even harder you could perhaps link that to healing and then try to tie it back to Christ but you have to be looking for it. You can make almost anything line up and seem true if you are trying hard enough. However, if you step back and look at it with a non-bias eye, Quetzalcoatl could much more easily be lined up with satan than with Christ.

I will discuss this further in my next post.

(*Please note, the photos are not mine.)