| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 07/12/2009 6:01:45 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Locked. |
Posted on 05/08/2008 5:04:47 PM PDT by Grig
"The record is now published in many languages as a new and additional witness that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God and that all who will come unto him and obey the laws and ordinances of his gospel may be saved.Concerning this record the Prophet Joseph Smith said: "I told the brethern that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book."
About this edition: Some minor errors in the text have been perpetrated in past editions of the Book of Mormon. This edition contains corrections that seem appropriate to bring the material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions edited by the Prophet Joseph Smith.
There you go; judging another.
SHAME!
Pray for WHIMS!!!!!
Too bad for ol' Joe that what GOD knew about what was gonna happen in that jail; he kinda, ahem, withheld from him!
I’m listening ... Quix is one of myy FR friends. If he’s in crisis we need to act, NOW!
What an absolute HOOT!
From the folks who glombed onto JESUS CHRIST to stick into THEIR Organizational name!!
ANY church person receiving HOUSING from a church HAS to declare it's VALUE as INCOME!!
How much is a 8,000 sq ft penthouse in downtown SLC 'worth' these days?
And why should anyone that believes mormonism is a cult....believe FARMS?
That's like the DNC investigating the Democrat Congress.....
Using the standard of man to defend Joey? There are a lot of cults out there that continue to exist because there are people who are foolish/brain washed enough to follow them. There are people that still believe the earth is flat.
(you go on to slander a good man, but it's wasted breath because you premise is flawed, right along with your "facts" on Joseph Smith. I hope men are kinder to your memory then you have been to Joseph's
Just because you wish my premise to be flawed doesn’t make it so. I can / have documented every portion of my claims in the past here. Poor Joey, the voice of history isn’t kind – only truthful.
Actually, i got the Context, thanks, and it's exactly what I mean, God will continue to come to us with his word, not stop inexplicably to do what he has done for all time and close his mouth and not speak nor reveal his truth. The bible has unfulfilled prophecies that speak of prophets... which means there should still be some.
Pending prophecies does not equal mormonic continued revelation – particularly that which contradicts the existing revelation. As you have been unable to prove in the past, there is nothing in mormonism that isn’t superior to revelations by JW’s, Scientology, Islam, etc. except a blind faith in Joseph Smith.
Yeah, it is agreed by Scholars that this addition to the Bible gives one of the places that was used in the defining the Doctrine of the trinity that God and Jesus are the same being, it's a typo? (or copy'o) Yeah the Clintonian that's old news, we've known about that major flaw in the Bible for longer than you've been alive, so it's still inerrant. LOL!
Nor does 4000+ changes to the bom? LOL. At least we can justify the identification of additions such as the Johnnane comma. How can you justify those changes to the most correct book on the planet.
Like the changes tot eh bible, Addition of verses, chapters foot notes and spelling corrections? yes the Book of Mormon has had similar changes, then there are the corrections Joseph made to the manuscripts, which the printer ignored, and the word white which was changed to pure because usage has changed, is that all you've got?
There are two handwritten MS in existence. Mormons admit that only a fraction of the changes are attributed to typesetting errors. Mormon historians have described the translation process being word for word. So grammar and spelling changes are questionable – unless your god has trouble spelling. However, significant changes outside of those documents have been made heres one of many:
2 Nephi 30:6 (1840 edition) — … and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white pure and a delightsome people.
(Later editions until 1981) … white and delightsome
(1981 to current edition) pure and delightsome
Before 1978 dark-skinned males were not allowed to hold positions of priesthood authority within the Mormon church. Today Mormon scriptures continue to teach that dark skin is a curse from God and a sign of His displeasure (See 1 Nephi 12:23; 2 Nephi 5:21; Alma 3:6). Brigham Young, second president and prophet of the LDS church referred to those with dark skin as being "cursed with a s[k]in of blackness" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 272). Christians can go back to extant ms, mormons go back to ???????? to justify these changes since it was the most correct.
First, you are the ones saying the Bible is complete an inerrant, since there are so many versions it's only logical to ask which one is since they disagree with each other sometimes.
Unable to tell the difference between translation – which are no inerrant, hmmmm? Most churches / denominations make the reference to inerrancy to the original ms. That is why scholars go the greek/Hebrew text. The bom has been changed thousands of times WITHOUT being able to refer back to the plates.
As to the JST, Emma retained ownership of the manuscript, and gave it to what is now the community of Christ Church, they won't give or sell the rights, so we are stuck with excerpts which are in the KJV as printed by the LDS church.
That is a cop-out. It is the perfected work of Smith and if it is the word of God, you are violating it on something this trivial? Because you cannot copywrite something means you cannot canonize it?
The Book of Enoch uncovered in the dead sea scrolls was not complete, that is true, so? many of the books of scripture recovered are not complete, until parts of the Book of Enoch were found there these same "Scholars" were insisting that the whole thing was written later, they were wrong.
You are ignorant of what was found at dss site. Look at your own statement – parts – not the whole, and those parts missing. All portions of 1 Enoch were found with the exception of Similitudes. And if you were not so context challenged – I said that those who have studied and translated the Similitudes portion indicate it was not written until after Christ, not the whole document, some as late as 2d century AD. The earliest version of Similitudes is IIRC 1400 AD.
As to Enoch being considered scripture, so Jesus Quoted from it, the apostles quoted from it, all of Christendom used it until it was not Canonized in Jamnia and even then it's use took hundreds of years to die out, we have it now largely because the Copts continued to use it into modern times (and still do) but hey one blanket quote from Godzilla and nope, it was never used by anybody (the evidence disagrees with you, so who to believe, you or my lying eyes...)
Your lying eyes. The Copts include it, they are the exception. Jesus didn’t quote from an unwritten document – he was citing Daniel. It (Enoch) was never counted as part of the Jewish canon and Jamnia only confirmed what was believed. Read a little FF Bruce regarding what the Jews considered canon and the difference from other works like the pseudographical 1 Enoch. If you had bothered to read – or do deeper research – you would see that this was not a blanket statement. Surprising since you are such an expert at that.
You are right about one thing, it's not a problem for us, we know how to recognize truth.
But lds inc. has not canonized it, right….
In case you were not paying attention, in the post I was responding to, I was specifically called out as one who disrespect the Bible. I hold the Bible in very high esteem, it is the word of God. I also recognize that it's not perfect. Others are insisting that it is, OK, let them back that assertion up when they attack me for not agreeing with them.
Not from what you have posted here on this thread. Oh the Johanne comma, bla bla.
Your time scale is not God's time scale, the falling away happened the the Son of perdition would be revealed, that does not mean immediately. Jesus died that all might be saved, that does not mean immediately, some of us are still down here screwing up (I mean me, no attack should be inferred here).
The scripture cited tells of a falling awayand the revelation of the son of perdition. Cannot have one without the other. He shall be revealed then in connection with the apostasy.
Please explain how this is a misapplication, really, I'd like to know what you think here.
I’ve told you numerous times – John was writing against Gnostic though trying to work its way into the church at that time.
LOL! Oh beautifully done, you stepped right into the center of the bear trap NONE OF WHAT YOU SAID IS TRUE. There are plenty of "Mystery" civilizations in the Americas, and there is plenty of evidence for (Do you really want me to list them Again?
Ohhhh, please don’t throw me in the briar patch! Mystery civilizations!!!!! Your are sooooo predictable and from the weekly world news fame, of mind if you want to continue to ruin your and the bom credibility go ahead. None of these mystery civilizations do not contain any thing that confirms the extensive, in the millions and millions, with large cities and temple, culture described in the bom. Even mormon archaeologists agree.
If I do you'll just claim the evidence is flawed and there fore there isn't any. or you'll fall back on "peer reviewed" and say anything not published by sources outside the churches is inadmissible (which is a ridiculous standard, let's apply it to say Christianity as a whole...)
. Christianity has archaeological support and doesn’t rely upon church funded hack sites. Archaeology from peer reviewed work is abundant to support biblical history. But then by your logic we should all believe that the earth is flat or the moon and sun are inhabited.
The DNA study that was so flawed the guys who actually did the research won't talk about it, only laymen who don't understand what was wrong do.
There have been multiple studies done, another was recently published. Add to that the other –pre dna studies that confirmed the mongoloid descent of the native Americans. They have no need to engage mormon skeptics. Mormon dna and anthropologist have left the mormonism in recent years because of the truth these studies have show – point to the make believe story that is the bom.
The Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,
this is sooooo laughable, and soooooo predictable. Here comes chiasmus being drug out again. Chiasmic patterns are present in Shakespear, Dr. Seuss and the bible (which is the most likely source since Smith copied so much of it). The book of Zelph probably even has chiasmus.
the Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters, (can you say reformed Egyptian which was a tough sell until other records started to show up that way...), then there's
Reformed Egyptian is still not recognized by real Egyptologists, and a posted article from Maxwell/FARMS. LOL real true scholarship.
The Paleo Hebrew written on a boulder in Los Lunas Arizona,
Keep writing, your credibility meter keeps falling. This website also has details of a visit by mormons investigators who told him it (the stone) didn’t support the bom or their research effort and left. Some resounding evidence DU. Further, the guy pushes a Phoenician origin, not Jewish, and contains Greek characters too.
The The Bat Creek stone with the ten commandments written in Hebrew,
Holy bat stone mormonman! Right, a single stone – linked to Masonic practices, upon which the whole of new world archaeology, mormon style is based.. Smithsonian Inst. does not recognize it as a nephite artifact either (was their dig). Where is the rest of the city? Where are the other overwhelming archaeological evidence that should be everywhere here?
there is the Discovery that if you follow the directions given in the Book of Mormon, you find all the unusual landmarks described in it for the middle east, including Naholm and Bountiful
Nibley didn’t agree with this route, nor does the story fit exactly either. They didn't find the name Nahom. They found NHM, which can be a number of things, depending on which vowels you choose to insert. The Mormons who discovered the markings decided it must be N-A-H-O-M because that's what they wanted to find. This is "reverse engineering." They looked until they found something vaguely like they wanted to find and declared it to be Bountiful, without any other corroborating research. Why is it they can find three letters in the desert but can't find entire cities, like Zarahemla after a century of looking? But then with the absence of all other evidences, the mormon faithful will grasp at any straw they can.
You will dismiss these one by one and insist that there is no evidence, of course not for there is no man so blind as those who will not see.
And I could provide evidence that the earth is flat, that would fit your definiton and use of evidence does not make it truth, especially if the interpretation of this evidence make it evidence for a much more plausible theory. But then too, mormon archaeologist have admitted there is no bom archaeology to begin with.
Actually, with the amount of effort that's been put into it you've come up with a surprisingly small amount of stuff. I mean the Treasure hunter stuff still gets play even though it's known to all come from the Salamander letter forged by Mark Hofmann, hey it says what you want it to say, keep using the discredited thing, make people point out that it was a forgery every time, challenge them to prove a negative, that's the ticket!
I’ve never cited Hofmann (although the living prophet and seer believed he was truthful – so much for supernatural insight huh. However the Tanners saw thru him and his frauds, hmmm who was more inspired). Smith’s treasure hunting is supported by plenty other documents – court documents. And IIRC, smith even discusses it in one of his early first vision accounts.
IMHO it's pathetic to pick on a man who was marytered for his faith, and make up stuff about him. pathetic.
He was murdered by a mob – true, he killed several of them during an escape attempt – hardly the lamb to the slaughter. He ordered the illegal destruction of a newspaper because it exposed his polygamy – so much for following the law of the land.
The Adam God theory was a Theory that was indeed talked about by Brigham young, I understand the theory, but it has never been the Doctrine of the church, so? It's not the only thing you guys misquote, come on the JOD is full of non cannoned theories by lots of prominent Mormons, you can do better then the AGT
Apart from Young’s inspired declaration that he never preached a sermon that should not be considered doctrine, which can easily be looked up, I’m sure that there are plenty of others who can show that other doctrines were linked to this one, particularly the old well loved phrase as man is God was and as God is man will become. However, his sermon was presented in total – how can you misquote an entire sermon. The teaching was clear within the sermon as it was in the extracted citations. But that was just one example. The other extracts on other subjects and speakers are shown to be clear as well.
I see nothing in the scriptures you quote about Satan answering a prayer to God.
And I’ve seen no statement in the scripture saying that Satan wouldn’t or couldn’t either. More broad brush misrepresentation we’ve all come to expect from you.
I suppose the Protestant were not too long ago Catholics and with the repudiation of some small differences could be again...
There were differences – yes. Different basic religion – no, we are both Christian.
But they are not now, nor are Mormons and the FLDS the same church, and you again don't look good claiming to be a man of God and bending the truth. God never lies, those who follow him shouldn't either.
So are you claiming mormonism never practiced and condoned polygamy? AFA LDS=FLDS, they are more like you than you are like Christianity theologically. I said what FLDS is today, LDS was about a century ago and LDS have not revoked Section 132 which officially sanctioned polygamy 100 yrs ago. What truth bending that?
So you would deny others the right to get an answer? Do you claim you can receive an answer for them? If you truly believe that they will receive a "NO" answer, then you should be saying fine, great, go read it, call us when God laughs when you ask if it's his, instead you guys get all stirred up and mad when I challenge people to read it, Why? The only logical reason is you are worried that people will get an answer and will know you have lied to them about us. (it's just logic...)
Man has free will – they can choose or not. I cannot reach out through my computer and stop them. But I also recognize that false prophets will go out and deceive many – that’s in the bible you know. If they have the full information – which mormons themselves admit they don’t provide – milk before meat – they can make an informed decision. I am comfortable knowing that it is less likely they will take mormonism literally after reading your nonsense.
Hence the discouragement of prayer...
Pot talking again? Where did I ever say not to pray in regards to making decisions……..don’t bother, you find it. What has been said, inspite of your twisting of our words is that study needs to be an important component – not superceded by feelings. No evidence of discouraging the Bereans from prayer either.
LOL, I think you have a Joseph Smith Fetish, i was thinking of Brigham young, but hey there are lots of dead guys to chose from and Anti's don't seem to be picky...
So you would discourage people from examining the claims of mormonism and its prophets? Are you saying that one is only allowed to believe the sanitized history of Joey– you would prevent them from doing that? If your posts indicate anything, it appears that you would not allow anything contrary BECAUSE he is dead. Tsk tsk DU, that is pretty lame.
From earlier in your post "That is because we have already received our spiritual message and the Spirit says NO." you say it's never done right after doing it... One of us is fluffy all right, but it's not me.
Mind reading again DU? Your word is inadequate to negate the testimony given to me. Remarkable – for a belief system based sooooooo much upon personal revelation and testimony – you a priori dismiss a contrary revelation. That is why the Bereans are such a good example – they studied the scriptures too in making their decision.
Detail? Verbosity is not detail, Detail is not accurate, I have read some very writings that had not a lick of truth in them, detail does not make truth, just detail. on the other hand i testify that I have received a witness direct from God and you denigrate it with "detail".
Oh puhlese! With angels and everything? I challenge the validity and source of your witness. You are allowed to challenge my witness but I can’t challenge yours? Not on my watch.
Yet you blithely stated that "FARMS has been on the LDS payroll since its inception." (Post # 941) When a quick Google proves that to be an utter falsehood, if you thought they were going to catch you, you wouldn't be so cavalier with the truth.
Misstatement because I didn’t google more deeply, my bad. FWIW, FARMS was nowhere until they came under BYU financial umbrella and they cannot be thought of today without associating it to byu. While speaking of utter falsehoods, you lied about me to others without a pinging me. You were pretty cavalier with the truth regarding the writers of NewAvent too. And you have been pretty cavalier here in this post twisting what I and others have posted to you.
I Said: Anti's don't believe God answers prayers to him.
U Said: Just a little earlier DU posted a statement saying that we lie about Mormon doctrine. Kettle meet pot.
I didn't say that all anti's believe that, but some sure do, I can point you to some posts where anti's told me exactly that when talking about Joseph's first vision, but I'm sure you could find them yourself if you wanted to (Google).
DU, do you even read what you post some times? U Said (repeated here) Anti’s don’t believe God answers prayer to him. You did not qualify the statement in any fashion – cavalier with the truth? If you are this cavalier with your words, your interpretation of others is suspect too.
Mormon theology is Christianty, if your beliefs are incompatible with Christinty, repent.
LOL, I quiver beneath the almighty du. If we applied your logic rigorously, then you would have to include RLDS, FLDS and the hundreds of other mormon subgroups as Mormons, LOL. Mormon theology is not that of Christianity, so why don’t you say it a few more times and really show us what you think.
I'm laughing on the inside...
And without answer on the outside.
Actually, it's not hard at all, in this very thread you said "That is because we have already received our spiritual message and the Spirit says NO." that quote was in response to me saying that anti's would do anything but encourage people to pray. Thus you either don't believe that is the answer they will get (which you protested is not so) or you think they are too dumb to get a prayer right and get the correct answer from God, take your pick.
Your testimony is no greater than mine in the subject aspect you put it in this post. My response was in regards to my self and my testimony of the spiritual revelation of the truthfulness (or more appropriately the lack of truthfulness) of the bom and mormonism. I could make the same argument against you on the same points you raise against me. LOL
Lurkers, Godzilla is a paid Theologian, he is paid to represent his church, I am an amateur, I get nothing for my service here.
Lurkers and other FReepers here. DU has pointed out in this post that he tells all that people like me are too stupid to use FR’s capabilities to search. Many months ago DU made this same accusation of me. I told him that if that makes him feel better about it thathe can believe what he wants to. I’ve let him continue because it so humorous the way he tries to paint that on me – as if it was truth that it some how negates what I post here. Now DU has accused me of being a paid Theologian again. This is applied in a manner that is equivalent to a personal attack. So what should my response be?
DU (and any interested Lurkers) please go to my profile page and see what I do for a living.
I am a volunteer minister at my church, in charge of multimedia and children’s ministries. I believe in the biblical call that I am a minister even if I don’t have the position, title or official college transcript. I don’t receive a single penny for my work on behalf of Christ. I post here to counter the false translation of Christian doctrine by many mormons here – DU being one of them (evident in my many exchanges with him).
My through my study of God’s Word, the bom and prayer, I can testify to every one here that the Spirit of God has shown to me that the bom is a fake document, written by a false prophet we’ve been warned about in scripture. Put the book of mormon to the test – is it a real historical document telling us about Jew who live in America, feel free to expand your search - since there is no valid evidence of such presence. The Bereans studied the scriptures to verify Paul’s teachings – and were commended for it. Your eternal life is too precious to place solely upon a subjective burning of the bosom.
Don’t buy a used car from J. Smith.
Its obvious the mods didn't figure they owed an explanation.
But that's fine, they don't owe me anything.
No; but they just might GIVE you something... for FREE!
Me; too!
And now he's TOP DOG!
Is this describe in D&C somewhere?
One man's trash; is another man's treasure.
words escape me.
“Your great learning has driven you insane.”
I don't wanna miss nuthin' or NOT insert my 1/50th of a dollar!
All right........
WHO slipped into my Elsiethon and got a post yanked?
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.