Eyeroll- Take out your King James Bible read through it. If it is a quality version, there will be italicized words among the verses. These are places where a direct translation cannot apply and make sense, so the writers did their best to "spackle the joints" with language that would make sense to an English reader. in a few cases, not many, these can have a small effect on the outcome of the text. Certainly not to any great doctrinal length. I can't think of any large doctrinal parts of the Bible that Mormons "throw out." Additionally, there are parts of the Bible that contradict other parts of the Bible, so you can either put the blame on "translation" or that God is confused. What are you going to go with?
The King James translation is beautiful but you're correct it isn't perfect. And its few imperfections were copied into the Book of Mormon (You do know that sections of Isaiah are copied into the BofM. Maybe you don't know that). But as far as sections "thrown out", yeah, Mormons reject the idea that we are saved by Grace, ie: that Jesus has already paid the penalty for us. Instead they hold to a doctrine where we have to do all we can do in order for his payment to be valid. Elder Bednar gave a talk on this - totally in conflict with Paul's words.
Can you give me an example of parts of the Bible contradicting other parts of the Bible? This is a vague myth that get repeated endlessly and you maybe heard it and are repeating it. If you have specific contradictions I'd like to hear them. I can give you one mormons have used with me and is apropos to the topic of grace vs. works: James 2:14-18. "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works." If James is saying you need works to be saved then that is in conflict with Paul's words, but that's not what James is saying. There were members in the early church who, hearing Paul's words on grace, went about confident that they'd been saved but NOT feeding His sheep, as it were. James is addressing this. IF you have faith THEN your works will be a demonstrable sign of that faith. If you don't do any works then you don't have faith in Jesus' words. This whole faith vs. works thing really gets into the minutia, but don't you agree that a minute study of Christianity is superior to a general one?
I'm reminded of Matthew 7:21-23 where Jesus is tells of separating the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats:
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
So these people believe they were following Christ, right? They said hey we we prophesied in Your name and cast out devils in Your name, so they consider themselves followers of Christ. But what is Jesus' reply? I don't know you.
Who are these "Christians" who believe they are followers of Christ but don't really know Him? Anyone else ever wondered this? I don't know who these people are but they might be mormons. Mormons waste a lot of their study on the talks in conference (which are often very good - Jeff Holland is a charismatic orator - but so was Paul Dunn). Or they study the BofM - and there's a lot of stuff that agrees with Christianity in the BofM, although none of those people ever existed and Jesus never came to this continent to deliver the sermon on the mount. If the BofM were an actual record of history we would expect to find some remnant of these huge battles, these populous people. But nothing. And so "faithful" member are left scrambling to explain this lack of evidence. And what is their testimony finally rested on? Faith that J.Smith was telling the truth even though there is nothing to back it up. This is a test of our faith to see if we'll believe in spite of the fact that there is no evidence these people ever existed. Does God really want us to ignore this discrepancy? Is that God's character? Or were the old Testament prophesies supposed to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ to give evidence that the prophets were telling the truth - evidence. Anyway, I love my mormon family and friends but I wish they would follow after truth no matter what the outcome turns out to be. And though it's earth shattering to realize what we were raised in is not as terrifically true as we'd been told, the truth is Jesus still wants us to know Him. The truth about Him. Don't listen to Charles Taze Russell and his JW Watchtower. Same goes for J.Smith and his take on Christianity.
Oh, man. I just thought of something else. Go read the King Follet discourse - it's on lds.org. Joe Smith talks about the true nature of God and it's hilarious. Don't you think the nature of God is kind of a big deal?
