Latayne Scott: "Using those [the LdS Church's 'faithful' Mormon History] guidelines, a 'faithful history' Bible, for example, might omit Abraham's lies about Sarah, David's adultery, and Peter's denials of Christ." Do you agree or disagree? Why
by 
Mister IT has a Liahona equipped COAT
ANSWERS: 1
-
I disagree the "faithful" Mormon history includes many of the mistakes of early church leaders. I personally see the Bible as what you often refer to as a "faithful history" if I understand correctly your deffinition. (that is a history compiled, according to claimed inspiration, of those stories that promote faith) The Bible does not chronicle if full the lives of it's characters everything that is in there is for the intent of Testifying of Christ, and the power of God. Omitting Abrahams lie, David's adultery, Peter's denial, or Joseph Smith's giving in to the pressures of men would rob us of the glorius scenes of divine mercy and justice which follow which are most certainly faith promoting.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC