Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Joseph Smith's Translation Of Genesis 1:1 [Source: Jews for Judaism]
Jews For Judaism ^ | Gerald Sigal

Posted on 08/17/2012 12:06:21 PM PDT by greyfoxx39

Acceptance of the Bible by the Mormon Church is qualified by a statement credited to Joseph Smith and which now appears in article eight of the Mormon Articles of Faith, "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." Joseph Smith is also quoted as saying, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors."1 Proclaiming belief in the Bible as originally written, as opposed to a corrupt contemporary version, assumes a knowledge of the original biblical text. As such, was Smith able to reestablish the "original" biblical text or, at least, the extent to which the Bible is "translated correctly"? Perhaps the best way to test his knowledge and abilities is to study his textual criticism of Genesis 1:1.
Joseph Smith said:

I shall comment on the very first Hebrew word in the Bible. I will make a comment on the very first sentence of the history of creation in the Bible- Berosheit. I want to analyze the word. Baith--in, by, through, and everything else. Rosh--the head. Sheit--grammatical termination. When the inspired man wrote it, he did not put the Baith there. An old Jew, without any authority, added the word. He thought it too bad to begin to talk about the head! It read first, "The head one of the Gods brought forth the Gods." That is the true meaning of the words. Baurau signifies to bring forth. If you do not believe it, you do not believe the learned man of God. Learned men can teach you no more than what I have told you. Thus, the head God brought forth the Gods in the grand style.

……………………………………………………………………………………………

In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Don't the Bible say he created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize--the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time He had. . . .2

In a similar vein, Joseph Smith said:

. . . Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods, in spite of the whims of all men. Without a revelation, I am not going to give them the knowledge of the God of heaven. You know and I testify that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods. I have it from God, and get over it if you can. I have a witness of the Holy Ghost, and a testimony that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods in the text. I will show from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods; and I want the apostates and learned men to come here and prove to the contrary, if they can.
An unlearned boy must give you a little Hebrew. Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aushamayeen vehau auraits, rendered by King James' translators, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." I want to analyze the word Berosheit. Rosh, the head; Sheit, a grammatical termination. The Baith was not originally put there when the inspired man wrote it, but it has been since added by an old Jew. Baurau signifies to bring forth; Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God, in the singular number; and by adding the word heim, it renders it Gods. It read first, "In the beginning the head of the Gods brought forth the Gods," or, as others have translated it, "The head of the Gods called the Gods together.
" . . . The head God organized the heaven and the earth. I defy all the world to refute me. In the beginning the heads of the Gods organized the heavens and the earth. Now the learned priests and the people rage, and the heathen imagine a vain thing. If we pursue the Hebrew text further, it reads, "Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aashamayeen vehau auraits"-"The head one of the Gods said. Let us make a man in our own image." I once asked a learned Jew, "If the Hebrew language compels us to render all word sending in heim in the plural, why not render the first Eloheim plural?" He replied, "That is the rule with few exceptions; but in this case it would ruin the Bible." He acknowledged I was right. . . .3

Joseph Smith claimed that God Himself taught him that there is a plurality of Gods. He then states, "I will show you from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods."

In his attempt to show that the first word of the Bible, be-ray-sheet, indicates that there is a plurality of gods Smith actually proves the fallaciousness of his doctrine.
To begin with, Smith's transliteration of the Hebrew words of Genesis 1:1 betrays a flagrant lack of knowledge of the sound values of certain consonants and vowels (e.g., berosheit for be-ray-sheet, aushamayeen [alternately aashamayeen] for ha-sha-ma-yeem, vehau for ve-ayt, and auraits for ha'aretz).

On the basis of Smith's own interpretation of the first verse of Genesis, one must reject his claim to divinely given knowledge of the plurality of gods doctrine or that this doctrine can be proved by reference to this verse. In his analysis of the first word of Genesis, be-ray-sheet, which Smith transliterates as berosheit, he reveals his lack of knowledge of the Hebrew language. He says that "When the inspired man wrote it, he did not put the Baith there. An old Jew, without any authority, added the word. He thought it too bad to begin to talk about the head! It read first, 'The head one of the Gods brought forth the Gods.”How convenient to arbitrarily dismiss that which would interfere with ones explanation by ascribing it to an unidentified "old Jew."

Throughout the centuries the Jewish people have transmitted the sacred text of the Torah with extreme care, so that not one letter should be changed, added, or deleted. When then could an unauthorized "old Jew" have made this change without causing protest over a spurious addition? Incidentally, the supposedly added "word" is not a word at all, but the single letter bet, which when prefixed to a word becomes the inseparable preposition "in." Furthermore, if the affixing of this inseparable preposition is to be attributed to "an old Jew" why is Smith quoted in the History of the Church (see above) as saying of Genesis 1:1 that "It read first 'In the beginning. . . .'" We must, therefore, conclude that Smith could not decide if "the inspired man" or "an old Jew" placed the prefix letter bet at the beginning of Genesis.

What is Smith's source for this improbable tale about "an old Jew"? Why should this so-called "old Jew" even be concerned "about the head" being mentioned when in fact rosh, which is the Hebrew word for "head," is not the proper pronunciation for the second syllable of the first word of Genesis? The second syllable should not be -rosh nor even -raysh, but simply -ray. There is no double shin in be-ray-sheet. The shin is the opening consonant of the last syllable -sheet. Smith calls the last syllable, which he transliterates as -sheit, a "grammatical termination." However, no such "grammatical termination" exists in Hebrew. Properly, one can say that this word ends in the feminine singular construct ending -eet. If the text of Genesis 1:1 is rendered literally, the translation is: "In the beginning of God's creating the heaven and the earth." This translation is necessary because ray-sheet never means "the beginning" but rather "the beginning of" (cf. Genesis 10:10, Deuteronomy 18:4, Jeremiah 26:1). If the text were to be rendered: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" it would be necessary to write ba-ree-shonah, "at first," rather than be-ray-sheet, which form occurs only in Scripture in the construct state.

Joseph Smith's teaching that "Eloheim is from Eloi, God, in the singular number" further illustrates his unfamiliarity with the Hebrew language. The singular form of the noun "God" is 'Eloha, not Eloi, which is not even a Hebrew word; 'Eloi as used in Mark 15:34 means "my God" and may be a variant of the Aramaic 'Elohi. Joseph Smith's claim that the word 'Elohim in Genesis 1:1, having a plural ending indicates that there are many gods is completely without merit. A careful investigation of the actual use of this word in the Scriptures will unequivocally show that 'Elohim, while plural in form, is singular in concept. In biblical Hebrew, many singular abstractions are expressed in the plural form, for example, rachamim, "compassion" (Genesis 43:14, Deuteronomy 13:18); zequnim, "old age" (Genesis 21:2; 37:3, 44:20); n'urim, "youth" (Isaiah 54:6, Psalms 127:4).
It is interesting to note that no less a Mormon authority than James E. Talmage, in his own writings, contradicted Smith's rendering of the word 'Elohim. "In form the word is a Hebrew plural noun; but it connotes the plurality of excellence or intensity, rather than distinctively of number. It is expressive of supreme or absolute exaltation and power. Elohim, as understood and used in the restored Church or Jesus Christ, is the name-title of God the Eternal Father. . . ."4

This understanding of the word is quite different from that of Smith's who, in his ignorance of the Hebrew language, rendered 'Elohim, in Genesis 1:1, as a plural. Scripture teaches us that 'Elohim, which is the plural of majesty, is used not only in reference to God, but also for angels (divine beings) and human authorities of high stature in society. This can be clearly seen, for example, from the following usage. Manoach, the father of Samson (Judges 13:22), after seeing "an angel of the Lord," said: "We shall surely die for we have seen 'elohim."
Concerning human authority, we read in Exodus 22:8: "Both parties shall come before the 'elohim ["judges"], and whom the 'elohim ["judges"] shall condemn, he shall pay double to his neighbor." It is, therefore, ludicrous to infer from 'elohim, in the first verse of Genesis, the existence of a plurality of gods. Where is the plurality of persons when a single angel, referred to as 'elohim, visited Manoach? How can the Mormon Church explain the words of the woman to Saul when, upon seeing Samuel, she explained: "I see 'elohim coming out of the earth" (1 Samuel 28:13)? Although 'elohim is followed by the verb in the plural, it refers to only a single individual as is clearly seen from verse 14: "And he said to her: 'What is his appearance?' And she said: 'An old man is coming up; and he is wrapped in a robe.'" Thus, even with a plural verb this noun may still refer to a single individual.

In Genesis 1:1 the verb bara, "he created," in the singular, preceding 'Elohim, contradicts positing a plurality of gods. That the singular form 'Eloha and the plural form 'Elohim are identical, when referring to the God of Israel , can be seen from their interchangeable use in Isaiah. In Isaiah 44:6 we read: "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last, and besides Me there is no God ['Elohim]." This is followed in verse 8 by: "Is there a God ['Eloha] beside Me?" If the truth of the doctrine of a plurality of gods depends in any measure on the plurality in form of the noun 'Elohim, the use of 'Eloha, the singular of the noun, within the same context, most decidedly disproves it. The underlying reason for the grammatically plural form 'Elohim is to indicate the all-inclusiveness of God's authority as possessing every conceivable attribute of power.

The use of the plural for such a purpose is not limited merely to 'Elohim, but also applies to other words of profound significance. For instance, Isaiah 19:4 uses 'adonim ("lords") instead of 'adon ("lord"): "Into the hand of a cruel lord" (literally "lords," even though referring to one person), and Exodus 21:29: "Its owner [literally, be'alav, "its owners"] also shall be put to death." 'Elohim means "gods" only when the Scriptures apply this plural word to the pagan deities. The pagan Philistines applied the title 'elohim to their god Dagon (Judges 16:23-24, 1 Samuel 5:7). The Moabites, likewise, used the word 'elohim to describe their god Chemosh (Judges 11:24). That the plural form of 'Elohim does not at all imply a plurality of gods is a fact attested to by the ancient Greek version of the Scriptures, the Septuagint, which renders 'Elohim with the singular title ho Theos ("the God").

The Book of Mormon gives evidence that Joseph Smith apparently learned about the functioning of the masculine plural ending -im, which he renders as -heim, some time after his alleged translation of that book. Hebrew masculine plurals generally end in -im. To add an -s to such words when introducing them into English is incorrect. For example, the Hebrew noun keruvim may be written in English as cherubim or even cherubs, but never cherubims. The noun cherubim is already in the plural form (cherub in the singular). To add an -s to it would be similar to the adding of an -s to the word children. The noun cherubim appears three times in modem editions of the Book of Mormon (Alma 12:21, 42:2-3), and is used correctly. However, in the first edition of the Book of Mormon the word appeared in all three places as cherubims, with the -s improperly added.5 Two of the changes were made prior to the 1888 edition, however, Alma 12:21 of the 1888 edition still retained the word cherubims and was apparently changed at some later date. Similarly, the plural of seraph is seraphim. Seraphim appears twice in the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 16:2, 6). While it is used correctly in modern editions, in the first edition it appears improperly as seraphims.6 The 1877 edition of the Book of Mormon reads, at 2 Nephi 16:2, 6, the same as the 1830 edition, therefore, the changes must have been made at a later date. The appearance of these two erroneous plural forms in the first edition of the Book of Mormon should come as no great surprise.

Smith, as we have seen above, had little, if any, knowledge of Hebrew language and grammar. In writing the Book of Mormon, assuming he is the author, Smith relied heavily on the King James Version of the Bible, where these two nouns are erroneously rendered as cherubims (for example, Genesis 3:24) and seraphims (for example, Isaiah 6:2). All said, Smith shows himself to have been a fraud who misled his followers with fanciful renderings of Scripture.



1 Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1958, p. 327.

2 Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Liverpool: F.D. Richards, vol. 6 (1844), pp. 4-6.

3 Joseph Smith, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ed., B.H. Roberts, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, vol. 6, 1976 p. 475.

4 Talmage, Jesus the Christ, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1962, p. 38.

5 See the first edition of the Book of Mormon, pp. 256, 337, 338.

6 See the first edition of the Book of Mormon, p. 91, lines 28 and 38.

© Gerald Sigal


TOPICS: General Discusssion; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Politics; Theology
KEYWORDS: antimormonjihad; bookofmormon; christianjihad; josephsmith; mittromney; mormondefenders; notthiscrapagain
Response from a Jewish source to multiple posts on another thread regarding mormonism and Judaism.
1 posted on 08/17/2012 12:06:31 PM PDT by greyfoxx39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya; Colofornian; Elsie; svcw; Zakeet; Tennessee Nana; aMorePerfectUnion; Godzilla; ...

Ping


2 posted on 08/17/2012 12:24:35 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
We know from ancient documents which have been found that the text we have today is accurate. The differences between the documents are negligible and make no material difference to the meaning.

Course, Joe Smith wasn't exactly a biblical scholar, nor was he any kind of expert in archeology or ancient languages. And to be fair, there have been a number of document finds since his day.

3 posted on 08/17/2012 12:24:55 PM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

The lds-org denies that Jesus is the Creator, that everything was created BY Him.

Pray they repent of their falsehoods and see the Truth.

The lds-org is a thief of the Name and the Truth of Jesus Christ.

4 posted on 08/17/2012 12:26:18 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Joseph Smith is also quoted as saying, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.

I don't know, I would think that the Jewish people who have been so very careful in preserving the Torah would be slightly (greatly) offended by the words of this sexual predator/charlatan.

But some apparently are not. >>>shrug<<<

5 posted on 08/17/2012 12:30:20 PM PDT by colorcountry (The gospel will transform our politics, not vice versa (Romans 12:1,2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

You post from a site that appeals to Messianic Jews or ‘Jews for Jesus’ that does not have the same explanation for all non-Jewish faiths.

That is pretty intellectually dishonest.


6 posted on 08/17/2012 12:36:31 PM PDT by sf4dubya (I rebelled against my parents by becoming a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
At the same time Smith managed to come up with the same arguments the Sa'ami shamen used to argue with the Orthodox priests who'd come to convert them to Christianity in the early 1500s.

They'd been worshipping Thor, Odin, The 3 or 4 Household goddesses, Herb Woman and Little Red Man. As pagans for thousands of years they obviously didn't want to give up their traditions.

The priests made a compromise. Inasmuch as the Far North has no grain nor grapes, they allowed them to keep Little Red Man as a Sacrament. There was no end of troubles from that one. This is an hallucinogenic mushroom.

We first encounter these people in the early 1600s in America pursuing their own version of Christianity out on the frontier ~ they called it Church of the First Born.

They got along well with the Indians according to many other sources.

No doubt!

7 posted on 08/17/2012 12:37:20 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

I was delighted to find from your source that mormons do not consider Jewish people suitable candidates for conversion.


8 posted on 08/17/2012 12:37:46 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya; greyfoxx39
You post from a site that appeals to Messianic Jews or ‘Jews for Jesus’ that does not have the same explanation for all non-Jewish faiths.
That is pretty intellectually dishonest.


How exactly is that "intellectually dishonest"? The poster plainly and explicitly asked for Responses from a Jewish source to multiple posts on another thread regarding mormonism and Judaism.

What is intellectually dishonest are all those trinitarian christians who have now decided to add their 2 cents when the poster didn't ask for it.
9 posted on 08/17/2012 12:41:04 PM PDT by brent13a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya

I believe it is a counter-missionary site -— Jews for Judaism.


10 posted on 08/17/2012 12:42:20 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: brent13a
You misread my post in No.1. What it actually says is "Response" from a Jewish source to multiple posts on another thread regarding mormonism and Judaism...meaning the article is IN RESPONSE.

What is intellectually dishonest are all those trinitarian christians who have now decided to add their 2 cents when the poster didn't ask for it.

The article is a rebuttal of mormonism. Trinitarian Christians are welcome to respond.

11 posted on 08/17/2012 12:46:08 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca; sf4dubya; greyfoxx39
I believe it is a counter-missionary site -— Jews for Judaism.

Thank you for pointing that out as opposed to jumping to conclusions and all of that.
Yes, it is a counter-missionary site. It's purpose is to counter all the christian zionists that masquerade as "Messianics". Not that this topic has anything to do with the Poster's main posting but there are very few actual "Messianic Jews" because the ones who parade that title around are 99% of the time just christian zionists who maintain their triniartianism and paulinism while calling Jesus "Yeshua".
12 posted on 08/17/2012 12:48:08 PM PDT by brent13a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle; Kevmo; Resettozero

You may have already been pinged, just thought this thread might interest the three of you.


13 posted on 08/17/2012 12:48:59 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (If you fear Obama, you'll vote for Romney. If you fear God, you won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca; sf4dubya; greyfoxx39
You misread my post in No.1.

My bad....flame away, then.
I had higher expectations for the discussion on such a posting.
14 posted on 08/17/2012 12:51:26 PM PDT by brent13a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
"The head one of the Gods brought forth the Gods."

That's the opening line for Battlestar Galactica.

15 posted on 08/17/2012 12:52:06 PM PDT by roylene (Salvation the great Gift of Grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya; Religion Moderator; Jim Robinson
Remember when you were whining about wanting to move another thread to the Religion Forum? Well guess what!

Your comment "That is pretty intellectually dishonest." is making it VERY personal.

16 posted on 08/17/2012 12:53:56 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: brent13a

You are welcome to discuss the article, but please leave the “flames” against Trinitarian Christians out of it, since that was not my intent.


17 posted on 08/17/2012 12:59:13 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: brent13a
That is an interesting point about christian zionists.

How does that compare to mormonism, which is not Trinitarian but polytheistic.

18 posted on 08/17/2012 1:03:12 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Thanks for the ping. I’m having trouble wading through all the Berosheit.


19 posted on 08/17/2012 1:03:35 PM PDT by Kevmo ( FRINAGOPWIASS: Free Republic Is Not A GOP Website. It's A Socon Site.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

The lds-org denies that Jesus is the Creator, that everything was created THROUGH Him, BY Him and FOR Him.

They deny that Jesus created even the angels out of nothing.

They do NOT teach the truth about Jesus.

20 posted on 08/17/2012 1:04:40 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brent13a

“Yes, it is a counter-missionary site. It’s purpose is to counter all the christian zionists that masquerade as “Messianics”. Not that this topic has anything to do with the Poster’s main posting but there are very few actual “Messianic Jews” because the ones who parade that title around are 99% of the time just christian zionists who maintain their triniartianism and paulinism while calling Jesus “Yeshua”. “


You should setup a thread to discuss those evil “Christian zionists” who maintain their “triniartanism and paulinism” while calling Jesus “Yeshua.”

I have a can of whoopass that needs to be opened before the expiration date.


21 posted on 08/17/2012 1:10:31 PM PDT by RaisingCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya
See;

paying particular note of both who is saying such, and the context in which it is said.

Thnx

22 posted on 08/17/2012 1:10:50 PM PDT by BlueDragon (going to change my name to "Nobody" then run for elective office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

If I get all hung up in Romney’s Mormon theological leaders, I’ll get all hung up and not able to do what I have to do in November in order to escape from Obama’s Muslim/Black Muslim theological leaders and their intent to enslave me. - As I voted for Palin with McCain, I’ll vote for Ryan with Romney.


23 posted on 08/17/2012 1:15:03 PM PDT by Twinkie (John 3:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya

Just to be clear, Rabbi Kravitz and ‘Jews for Judaism’ are engaged in ANTI-Christian missionary polemics. He frequently exhibits mesiras nefesh in rescuing Jews from various Christian and quasi-Christian groups.


24 posted on 08/17/2012 1:23:59 PM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
There has been involvment with Judaism being used in defending mormonism for 3-4 days. Is this something you approve of?

In case you missed it, Jim Robinson started the thread, and the closing paragraph of his post is worth noting.

Link

The article you are responding to is in response to this, and has nothing to do with the link you posted.

"Making it personal" is not allowed in the Religion Forum.

25 posted on 08/17/2012 1:25:37 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Twinkie

I will vote third party. Each of us has the right to vote as we see fit.


26 posted on 08/17/2012 1:29:08 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
I believe it is a counter-missionary site -— Jews for Judaism.

This. It is one Jewish organization's response to alternative interpretations of Jewish religious texts by other religions that also use those same texts as part of their sacred tradition. Your mileage will depend on your religious perspective. I assume that Joseph Smith needed an interpretation that would allow for a subsequent text like the Book of Mormon to be the final word for his faith, but I'm not Mormon and it is just an educated guess.
27 posted on 08/17/2012 2:17:06 PM PDT by rockvillem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: brent13a

I guess I am getting old, or have too low of expectations, but I don’t care about what the Nazarines do or if they adopt the trappings of Judaism. The study of Judaism is good for anyone, and that is going to be the source of real converts I suspect.

Now, Jewish folk drifting to Nazarine; that is a different issue.


28 posted on 08/17/2012 2:41:18 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya; greyfoxx39
That is pretty intellectually dishonest.

What is intellectually dishonest SF is to misrepresent the link as something it is NOT - probably because you didn't go there. From its home page part of its mission statement states -

Jews for Judaism was established in 1983. It has become the Jewish community's leading response to the multi-million dollar efforts of cults and evangelical Christians who target Jews for conversion.

In simpler words - it is to counter Messianic Jew or "Jews for Jesus". You point the finger of 'dishonesty' forgetting the other fingers are pointing back at you.

29 posted on 08/17/2012 2:55:55 PM PDT by Godzilla (3/7/77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

:D


30 posted on 08/17/2012 2:57:57 PM PDT by colorcountry (The gospel will transform our politics, not vice versa (Romans 12:1,2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

That is SUCH a familiar tactic we have seen over the years.


31 posted on 08/17/2012 3:00:02 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; colorcountry
That is SUCH a familiar tactic we have seen over the years.

And shows how stupid the individual's comments are.

32 posted on 08/17/2012 3:03:49 PM PDT by Godzilla (3/7/77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca; All

You’re right. I made a hasty glance; apologies. Weird they don’t list any other religions on the left side navigation.


33 posted on 08/17/2012 3:15:57 PM PDT by sf4dubya (I rebelled against my parents by becoming a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; brent13a; jjotto; rockvillem; Godzilla

Please do not ping me to threads in the Religion forum that do not relate to Judaism itself.

Again, apologies for the hasty glance and miscategorization of the source site & the unnecessary insult.


34 posted on 08/17/2012 3:37:58 PM PDT by sf4dubya (I rebelled against my parents by becoming a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya

Please don’t ping me with imaginary complaints.


35 posted on 08/17/2012 3:39:33 PM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya
Please do not ping me to threads in the Religion forum that do not relate to Judaism itself.

Please do not ping me to posts that present Anti-Christian tenets and doctrines, no matter what forum they are in....mmmmkay?

36 posted on 08/17/2012 3:46:31 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya
Please do not ping me to threads in the Religion forum that do not relate to Judaism itself.

Fine, then don't stick your nose into threads not dealing with Judaism.

37 posted on 08/17/2012 4:59:26 PM PDT by Godzilla (3/7/77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya
Do not accuse another Freeper of telling a lie. It attributes motive, i.e. the intent to deceive. It is "making it personal."

Words such as "false" "error" "wrong" do not attibute motive.

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

38 posted on 08/17/2012 8:06:06 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Scary stuff...


39 posted on 08/17/2012 9:07:57 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana (Why should I vote for Bishop Romney when he hates me because I am a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sf4dubya
So then is your argument that the information is incorrect in the article?

In that vein are you saying Jews are Polytheistic?

40 posted on 08/18/2012 4:46:15 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Christians (Trinitarians as it were I guess) MUST respond to Mormonism...
41 posted on 08/18/2012 4:53:08 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
"God's primary demand of people is that they act decently toward one another."

Dennis Prager, Ethical Monothesism

42 posted on 08/18/2012 8:47:31 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
I was delighted to find from your source that mormons do not consider Jewish people suitable candidates for conversion.

Then, why have they baptized millions of holocaust victims into the mormon church. Do you find that delightful also?

****************************************

http://www.jewishgen.org/InfoFiles/ldsagree.html

The wrongful baptism of Jewish dead, which disparages the memory of a deceased person is a brazen act which will obscure the historical record for future generations. It has been bitterly opposed by many Jews for a number of years. Others say they will never stop being Jews, simply because there is a paper saying they had been baptized, that the act of posthumous baptism is unimportant and should be ignored. We think this to be a narrow, parochial, and shallow view. We will continue opposing this wrongful act which assimilates our dead to the point where it will not be possible to know who was Jewish in their lifetimes.

A protest drive initiated by Jewish genealogists escalated it to a nationally publicized issue that was followed by public outcry. American Jewish leaders considered it an insult and a major setback for interfaith relations. They initiated discussions with the Mormon Church that culminated in a voluntary 1995 agreement by the Church to remove the inappropriate names. Activists continue to monitor Mormon baptismal lists, seeking removal of inappropriate entries.

Has the church done anything to uphold its decade-old agreement with the Jewish community? The bad news is that the Mormons did (and still do) hijack Jewish genocide victims and other Jewish dead. Moreover, when a Jew is baptized, the door is open for all of his deceased ancestors to be baptized as well. Regrettably, their baptismal records place before the public a revisionist view that these deceased Jews were Mormons, a position they would have rejected in life.

A commentator on this topic said that anti-Semites who desecrate Jewish cemeteries want to destroy even the memory of Jews by breaking their tombstones and other symbols whereby we honor and remember them. He concluded that baptism of the Jewish dead is just a more sophisticated form of breaking tombstones.

A blogger wrote: "I don't buy the argument that it's done for selfless reasons. It's not selflessness, it's arrogance. And especially in light of the Mormon Church's agreement in 1995 to stop baptizing Holocaust victims, it's even more reprehensible for them to continue the practice. If a church can't be trusted to keep its word in a matter such as this, then where is its moral standing?"

We want to say this to all well-meaning Christians: We don't want to be saved, redeemed, forgiven, reincarnated, resurrected, or enraptured. We just want to be left alone. After 2000 years -- is it so much to ask?

In 1995 the LDS Church and representatives of the Jewish community signed the agreement described at the beginning of this article. Jews have objected to the continuing Mormon practice of wrongful baptism of the Jewish dead, especially in the case of Holocaust victims, claiming that the practice mirrored the forced baptism of Jews in the middle ages.

43 posted on 08/18/2012 2:07:35 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Dennis Prager is not one of my heroes.


44 posted on 08/18/2012 2:09:39 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Tell the 52,000 mormon missionaries to stop going worldwide proclaiming Christianity to be false.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Okay. May I ask why not?


45 posted on 08/18/2012 5:58:47 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: roylene

LOL..... Lorne Green as Commander Adama! Now that I just write that, lorne green sounds Jewish...and Adama could be a play on Adam (the first man.) I’m just sayin’..... :-)


46 posted on 08/18/2012 7:51:12 PM PDT by Phinneous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Dennis Prager not one of my rabbis.... he’s not yet a religious (observant) Jew but he has some great commentary on philosophy and politics. For instance, he stresses liberty above equality as a theme. (that would be, equality of outcome, not equality under the law.)

But he clearly wants a religionist to come out acting more positively. In one fine analogy, he asks if one were walking in an alley and heard a group of men walking behind him, would he be less concerned for his safety if he knew the men just came from a Bible class...

Sorry, lots of build up for a question (skipping the curiosity of why he’s not one of your heroes.) Double apologies if you’ve explained it elsewhere— why not vote against Obama (ie for the polytheistic Romney?) He clearly wants you to be free(er) to practice your religion than Obama wants. He is decent (as many Mormans are ... like my roommate at the Academy) and will preserve the country just a wee bit longer to finally FINALLY field a rock-ribbed conservative 4 or 8 years later. The president isn’t the Bishop in Chief.

What do you feel is the heart of the argument AGAINST Anybody But Obama?

Thanks.


47 posted on 08/18/2012 8:16:37 PM PDT by Phinneous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

“Then, why have they baptized millions of holocaust victims into the mormon church.”

I have no idea, nor do I care. Just reading your source.

“Do you find that delightful also?”

It’s meaningless as a savage dancing before a fire. I could care less. Keeps the mormons out of bars, I guess.


48 posted on 08/20/2012 8:03:56 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson