Sola Scriptura and The Book of Mormon

Now, regarding the 'other' book:  Many denominations struggle with the idea of 'another Bible'.  Some try to define Christianity on this sole point; a Christian being someone who accepts only the Bible as scripture.  (Oddly, I would think the definition of Christian should have something to do with accepting Christ, which is not an issue for Mormons at all).  

The concept of 'sola scriptura' is based in a couple of passages in the Bible that prohibit adding to or changing scripture.  An understandable prohibition, as altered scripture would probably alter belief and behavior and undermine any religion with a text as its manifesto or constitution.  The prohibition is found in the early Old Testament (ironically, before several thousand years of scripture is appended) and in the Old Testament (again, ironically several thousand years after the first dictation of this rule). 

In a further irony, even after the canon was 'closed' chronologically, books were added and removed and sorted through centuries of revision, translation, and re-compilation.  Even today the re-translations continue, modern seminarians are required to study ancient greek in order to be qualified to interpret scripture, and no two Protestants carry the same version of the otherwise 'infallible' Bible.

So, the Mormon answer is: God still has the power to speak to man, still loves man, and man still needs God to speak. (Take a look around you.  Clearly we are lacking God).  And his word should be written and published.  And, as the the Bible states, no one should alter or revise the part of the written word that is His word.  But man is fallible, and so is often the written word, and so are all of the extant human languages used to write his word. So we continue to receive revelation until it is perfectly aligned with the will of God, and until God has no more to say to man.

The Book of Mormon has been criticized as a text designed to lead Christians astray, or created by the devil to create confusion, or as the work of a charlatan trying to sell a religion to oppress gullible followers. Then amusingly, the other criticism that comes frequently from our friends in other flavors of Christianity is, once they have actually read the Book of Mormon, is that the Book is 'too close to the the Bible', and that it has 'too many similarities to portions of the Old and New Testament', (it actually quotes them outright in many places). 

Most of the 13 million+ members of the LDS Church would tell you that while they find contradictions and ambiguities throughout the Bible, the Book of Mormon clears them up, agreeing with itself and simultaneously reconciling ideas in the Bible.  Not a bad piece of literary work for a young farm boy in rural New York in the early 1800s.

The Church of Mormon?

A recent article in the paper about a local businessman who had been called to serve as Bishop of his congregation attempted at the same time to give some background on the church.  The article was fair and kind, but had some unique phrasing to it - clearly the work of someone who has not had a lot of exposure to the LDS Church.  

One particular oddity was referring to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in this manner:  "commonly known as the Church of Mormon".  

I have heard us called by our full name as above, abbreviated as the LDS Church, and nicknamed the Mormon Church, but never as the "Church of Mormon".  

Members have been called Mormons since, as far as I can tell, the church was organized, because of our acceptance of "The Book of Mormon" as canon (scripture), one of the factors that most clearly distinguishes us from other Christian denominations.  But Book of Mormon is named for its compiler (not even its primary author, or the Savior it testifies of).  Mormon is a relatively minor character, aside from his contribution as the book's finisher.  

In short, it's not Mormon's Church.  It is the church that people nicknamed 'Mormons' attend. And they believe it is Christ's church.