Galatians 1:8

How can the Mormons justify this verse, with the story of the angel Moronhi?
Like Paul wondered how it was possible for the saints to move from a Gospel to another doctrine, I  too  wonder, that after years of debates and explanations, still our "friends" are frozen on this verse that nothing has to share with the story of Moronhi. Let's see why.

Paul is using an example, he is not saying that an angel would have come to bring any other Gospel. Anyway since the discussion is more interesting, we will pretend that Paul was saying that; so our friend will be happier .That is: an angel would have brought a different Gospel. This would be a sure proof, and there are many, that it wouldn't be strange if an angel will come bringing a gospel, true or false.
Paul, according to our "friends",  was saying that it would be possible   that an angel would bring a different Gospel, and in that case He would be Anathema,  that is damned.I  would agree if He brings a different Gospel, but if it was the same it would be different , right? At this point I am sure a choir of voices goes up: what would be the need to bring the same Gospel? It would seem a good question if there was not the problem of apostasy and that, like the Book of Mormon declares,   many precious thing were taken  from the Bible during this prophesied apostasy.
At this point, if somebody wants to go  deeper regarding this topic, he can go directly to "faith and works" in this web . We have only 2 problems in this context:
1 Show that the Book of Mormon is not a different Gospel,
2 Make sure that the Bible speaks about angels bringing books or Gospels, and that these books and Gospel are approved from the Lord.The ministering of  angels is a ministry  well known from the beginning of the scriptures, we have dozen of scriptures quoting them specially in the Old Testament, but to stay on the New Testament it is enough to quote Gabriel bringing the news to Mary  regarding the Savior her future Baby.Y ou have to remember that Gabriel was the same angel speaking to Daniel the prophet. Remember that was an angel delivering Apocalypse to John and so on.
Let's face the first problem.
It is strange that our "friends" name the Book of Mormon a "Different Gospel" after they maintained thousands of times that it was almost all copied from the King James version of the Bible at  the time of Joseph Smith, we can leave aside the parts regarding Isaiah and Malachi because are not Gospels, but 3 Nephi according to them was literally copied from the Bible. That is not completely true because if you take a deeper look you will see that there are very tiny different words. It contains the same teachings of the Savior, only clearer, practically the parts taken out were restored in this book, but since they don't recognize this it is better for me because I can say that they maintain that 3 Nephi was literally copied by  Joseph Smith from his Bible. So saying that they are maintaining that the Book of Mormon contains the same Gospel,   therefore why they are so angry regarding Galatians 1:8?
So if  the Book of Mormon is a different Gospel they have to say: we were nothing a mistake supporting this theory or vice versa. I guess they won't do anything they always like to have 2 feet in  10 shoes; it doesn't matter if the shoes are narrow or broken.
Revelation 14:6-7
6 ¶ And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
Here it would seem that an angel bring back the Gospel, because at the time of this vision there were the scriptures  already, The Bible was not all formed, because the second epistle of John was written after revelation, anyway it is also proven historically that the biblical canon,  like it is now,  was approved several centuries later.
The same person that asked me the question regarding Galatians 1:8, wrote me back again to say me that because this angel came after the vision of Christ with the 144000,   this book should come after the Christ coming. Here the pasta become a minestrone, because according to him Christ would come before  the fallen of Babylon. We will not understand why  the angel should bring a Gospel on the earth if Jesus was there, but above all we know that when Jesus will come he will introduce the millennium that   will be only for the believers. If you go ahead you will see in the chapter 14:12-13
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here [are] they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

13 ¶ And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed [are] the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.
So if all was in chronological order this  can't  happen. So what is the deal? Simple,  from the beginning John had several visions,  and that they are not in sequence is pretty simple to see . It is enough to read Chapter 11 where it is speaking for sure regarding to the last days. In fact it is speaking regarding the 2 prophets in the last days that they should die in Jerusalem. Think about it, Jerusalem was destroyed few years before  this vision from the Romans and from that moment on the Jews were scattered everywhere in the world until the second world war. After that the ONU gave them back the land in Jerusalem. But if you go to the Chapter 12 John has another vision completely different and it speaks about the war in heaven, clearly before the creation, is this chronology? It is pretty simple to understand that chapter 14:1-5 is regarding the same topic and the word "After" beginning in the verse 6   means that John had another vision. The Bible itself divides the 2 topics. Revelation, like the Book of Daniel,  was written with the purpose that only the inspired person can clearly understand it, see every church has its personal opinion about this book instead in the Gospels, they have difference of viewpoint but globally they agree pretty much on everything. Daniel himself had this same problem with his same book let's read in Daniel 12:4,8-10
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what [shall be] the end of these [things]?

9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
See,  Daniel himself didn't understand, but the Lord told him :Don't worry , the wise will understand".
Anyway since in the Bible it is better to have 2 witnesses regarding every topic, I have my second witness always in Revelation 10:1-2
¶ AND I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow [was] upon his head, and his face [was] as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire:

2 And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and [his] left [foot] on the earth,
Clearly, it seems that the Gospel and the little book quoted in those 2 scriptures where approved from God. Therefore we don't have any problem to say that in the last days 2 angels should bring one  little book, and unfortunately for my friend,  this one here is before of the 144,000 vision. In fact, he didn't write me back the second time, and the second the eternal Gospel. You could maintain that both are not the book of Mormon, but you have to admit that 2 angels have to come to bring............. and so on, because it is not my opinion , but the opinion of the book  both of us trust, right? Can we ignore it?
Do you want to know to who the verse in Galatians 1:8 probably  refers ?
Think about to another Gospel brought from an angel many centuries before Moronhi, that   didn't teach the same Gospel, declaring that Jesus was not resurrected but that there was a fraud from the same apostles. Jesus was not died on the cross and they took him before He died and they were able to heal Him.  Also this Gospel maintains that Jesus was a great prophet, but not the Son of God. I don't understand how it is possible to maintain this  if they say that Jesus was a great prophet, then they are saying that he was lying when he claimed to be the son of God, so was it possible for him to be a great prophet anyway?
See,  this Gospel destroys the divinity of Jesus and his Atonement. I could say easily that this is a very different Gospel, the main purpose of the Book of Mormon is :To show that Jesus is the Christ the Eternal God for all the nations.
So all the problem should be solved.
Another question received was about The Book of Mormon being  written from a   person other then Joseph Smith or copied from the Spaulding manuscript.
The first time people claimed that the Bom was copied from this manuscript, after a while other people said that Oliver Cowdery wrote it and at the end, Sidney Rigdon, but he was baptized in the church 1 year after the publishing of the Bom. The last one you can find in the web "Saints in Shock" of my dear friend Sharon. I wrote her about this and she wrote me back: I didn't know this. But she didn't change anything. Anyway I have her letter in my hands.
we know now for sure that the Spaulding manuscript   the book of Mormon was not copied from,  because few years ago, fortunately,  this book was found, and it has nothing to share with the Bom. For the story of Oliver Cowdery it is very interesting to consider this. If they decided to do a fraud, they should have done this for money or glory, right? I can't believe they did this only for fun, considering that the prophet was killed. So they decided to do a fraud, to make money, for glory or whatever. Oliver Cowdery wrote the Book of Mormon because Joseph was an illiterate at that time, but not so illiterate or stupid to forget to get the copyright. With the copyright he could take everything, money, glory or whatever, excuse me so the real stupid and illiterate was mister Cowdery that was supposed to be smarter and also HE WROTE THE BOOK . Not only Joseph didn't do anything and became the prophet, so he took the money the Glory and Whatever and Mister Cowdery the smart guy that wrote everything was also excommunicated from the church and he stayed silent, why he didn;'t say to Joseph : Hey Big guy if you do something wrong I will speak up regarding our trick, so you loose your money, your position and whatever. I guess that if really this one was the case mister Cowdery should have had a brain surgery, because he thought he was smart but instead he didn't have any brain. If that was the case.  This man when  excommunicated,   didn't say anything about it. He could say: Look! I don't care about mine excommunication because we know everything was a joke . Instead this man never denied his testimony but after a while he went back to be rebaptized. Well if there was a debate in court about this, I am not a lawyer but I would think to be confident to win the case. Let me add this regarding Martin Harris, the third witness of the bom. He sold a part of his farm to support the prophet in the publishing of the Bom, he had his wife against him, he too didn't have any copyright and never he was an important authority in the church, he was excommunicated too but never he felt to say something against his testimony, and he too came back to be rebaptized. Maybe Joseph Smith was surrounded by stupid people?