>reading the Bible but the not the sequel Explain yourself

>>9579100
>zero literary merit
>zero literary influence
>has been revised over 2,000 times due to errors
literal fanfiction. I don't know how Mormonism ever left the ground.

It's a really bad sequel. The other one is a bit better.

21.2% of all verses in the book contain the phrase "came to pass".

File: isaiah-scroll.l[1].jpg (37KB, 650x344px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 650x344px

>not reading the dead see scrolls or the gnostic gospels
>2011

ISHYGDDT

File: garfield_fatter_11_by_naruto3ever.jpg (28KB, 438x311px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 438x311px

>>9579100
>Taking a religion birthed by America seriously

File: 4f9.jpg (45KB, 600x848px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x848px

>>9579100

File: IMG_0324.jpg (20KB, 194x194px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 194x194px

>>9579111
>zero literary merit

>>9579100
Joseph Smith was a conman and Mark Twain said the Book of Mormon is terrible.

You have to read The Quaran first.

>>9579100
>reading the Bible but the not the sequel
Its not a sequel its starts before the new testament

>>9579796
Literally The Lion King 1 1/2 of religious texts

>>9579129
This.
That way you know in advance when and where the Angels will appear

>>9579111
>zero influence
true, but its a new book
>zero merit
pretty true, but there are a lot of interesting stories. Not nearly as good as the Bible imo
>revised over 2000 times
the original edit didn't have verse numbers or punctuation. There were like 2500 commas and periods added very quickly

>>9579124
the idea behind this is that
1) there are a few of the writers that used the phrase a lot, and
2) the language might not have had a manner to end sentences, so they used a phrase

>>9579747
kek'd

>>9579762
>so and so said
why not read it for yourself and get your own opinion?

>>9579796
sure, but the earliest part (book of Ether) starts during Genesis, doesn't change the fact that the Bible starts first.

t. Mormon

>>9579882
>sure, but the earliest part (book of Ether) starts during Genesis, doesn't change the fact that the Bible starts first.

I didnt say the bible didn't start first only that its not correct to call it a sequel given its relationship to the new testament.

Under your reasoning if the churches were to add a modern revelation to the Bible it would predate the BoM.

>not reading Dianetics

Explain yourself.

>>9579943
Too many prenatal engrams senpai

>>9579882
What do you think of the Book of Moses? I'm surprised the LDS doesn't emphasise it more since it explain the Mormon plan of salvation while the Book of Mormon doesn't add much in the way of theology.

>>9579882
If I convert to mormonism will I get a qt mormon wife?

>>9581245
Probably not, you'll be seen as born outside the covenant and therefore less desirable. And unless you live in Utah, the dating pool will be vanishingly small since you can't marry outside the church.

>>9581265
Well fuck that then

File: suff.jpg (76KB, 512x268px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 512x268px

>>9579846
>we won't experience third impact

>>9581030
>canonized
the book of moses is important to the church lel
it's pretty good, the chapters on Enoch are 10/10 feels amazing man
but the book of abraham is better and there is a bunch of conversation about where it came from

>>9581245
>>9581265 is full of shit
if you convert and go to BYU, then you can get married within 6 months, less if you go to BYU-Idaho

>>9582999
But all potential converts are told to read the Book of Mormon, when really they should be given the Book of Moses since it's a lot shorter and explains unqiue parts of Mormon theology that aren't in the BoM (plus it doesn't have Israelites in the Americas which turns off a lot of people).

I also like the Book of Abraham, the chapter where it goes into the cosmology of higher levels of planets and stars is pretty wack.