Meaning "may" have changed; he (BY) "may not have meant to" confuse. Lots of speculation there to re interpret what BY said and taught. I suppose you see the problem with BY's teaching that you need to hope that BY didn't mean what he said.
No, I just don't think he said what you said he said.
You still haven't answered whether your God will forgive unrepentant sinners, and exactly how a murderer can repent. I believe Moses had a few ideas in his time (which were not his ideas), but then you (all) reject the OT completely don't you? Despite God's clear statements in many places that "...this shall be a statute forever throughout your generations...".
BTW, I have used the term may in some of my responses merely to avoid the dogmatism that permeates most of the anti-mormon threads on FR. I find this particular subject too boring to take the time to give authoritative chapter and verse responses. That, and the fact that no matter how much "proof" I give of the Mormon position, you will refuse to accept it.
Now, if you want to discuss the lame-brained anti argument made in an earlier response in this thread that no archeaological evidence of the Book of Mormon has been discovered, that is a subject which interests me, and for which I can provide ample authoritative response. But please start another thread for that discussion and ping me. My time is limited to respond, so it may take a day or two.