Posted on 01/04/2009 8:07:31 PM PST by Stourme
THE CATHOLIC BIBLE
Holding the "Douay" Roman Catholic Version of the Bible aloft in my hand, I ask, "Do YOU accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?" For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic Truth Society have published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form. This Version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today. The Christian questioner is taken aback. "What Bible is that?" he asks. "Why, I thought you said that there was only ONE Bible!" I remind him. "Y-e-s," he murmurs hesitantly, "but what Version is that?" "Why, would that make any difference?" I enquire. Of course it does, and the professional preacher knows that it does. He is only bluffing with his "ONE Bible" claim.
The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today. Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the "cults"* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra "books" which they contemptuously refer to as the "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as "Revelation" by the Protestants), it is "revealed":
". . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book." (Revelation 22:18-19)
But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God! The outcasts are:
The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias
The Book of Baruch
The Buck of Esther, etc.
* This disparaging title is given by the orthodox to Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists and a thousand other sects and denominations with whom they do not see eye to eye.
I guess it would!
For it took a couple of SATANIC visitors to deceive Joseph Smith into STARTING the LDS Organization®!
Have you prayed about the OTHER lds scriptures as to THEIR 'truthfullness'?
Or do they just get accepted because the BoM seems to be right?
To this day the LDS Organization® "condemns" Presbyterians.
Why?
And yet, it's TEACHING have never been rescinded.
I, for one, find that a bit, shall we say... strange.
What 'standards' are these??
Whatever your purpose for cherrypicking and manipulating specific quotations from God's word to try and make your point, only you and he know.
What I, and any other good Christian knows is this:
Faith without works is dead, and there is a correct Biblical context for this statement.
We know this from The apostle Paul, who in Ephesians 2:8-9 writes: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Simply stated, we cannot earn our way to Heaven. Salvation is a Gift from our Father in Heaven, purchased through the blood of Jeus Christ. The purpose of this statement is to show that works do not save us, but that grace and faith do!
But that is only one part.
In the very next verse, Ephesians 2:8-10, shows that God calls members of His church for the very purpose of performing good works: "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them" (Ephesians 2:10). The apostle's language is very clear. God desires us to walk in good works, and He has prepared our spiritual educational process so that we will learn to do them. Doing good works in the name of Jesus Christ is a major part of the purpose for the life of each true Christian. We cannot truly be Christians without them but again - works are not the source of our salvation!
So what does the Apostle Paul teach us? That good works are an outcome and reflection of our faith in Jesus Christ. It is our faith in him that is the source of our Salvation.
“Wilford Woodruff is a prophet, . . . and he can make Scriptures as good as those in the Bible.”
Apostle J. W. Taylor, Conference, Salt Lake, April 5, 1897
_________________________________________
ROFLMBO
It is also insulting to God to claim that He couldn't find a more worthy vessel to "restore" His gospel (if it had ever been "lost") than the monumentally flawed Joseph Smith, and that God would actually condone THIS:
"no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are—I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent.
He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation—the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim—"Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true."
Mormon prophet Brigham Young, (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p.282-91)
What a puny "god" to rely on such as this to be his gatekeeper.
Let me get this straight...are you saying you received a testimony that the BOM is true? From whom/what did you receive this message? And the only thing that would trump this messenger would be an angelic visitation?
So, if the original testimony was not presented by an angelic visitation, why would such firepower be required to rescind the original message? If the original message was from the "Holy Ghost", which has the higher status as a message-bearer...the Holy Ghost or the angelic visitor?
By truthfulness are you saying that it documents ancient history here in the americas? If so, why is there absolutely no ruins mormon cities recognized to all, like those in Israel and Europe?
The bom claims that there was all kinds of plants and animals present here when Nephi arrived that science has shown were not here before the Spanish arrived.
The bom and prophets teach that the indians are the Lamanites of the bom, however, science through anthropology, dna studies, archaeology and linguistic studies, all indicate that the native americans are from asian (mongoloid) stock, not jewish (semitic) stock as they should be if the bom is true.
Smith said that the bom contains the fullness of the gospel, so why are the key gospel principles such as eternal progression, god being a man with a physical body, temple rites, baptism for the dead and others completely absent from it?
There are approximately 3000 changes to the bom since it was first published. Not all of these changes are grammatical or spelling. Smith's scribes testify that the translation came word by word and even letter by letter. If this is the case - why so many changes?
Finally, when Jesus died, he forgave those who had him crucified, yet when He came to America - he destroyed several cities and killed millions.
Is this the truthfulness you have found?
That’s a lot to defend there. I will try to address a lot but much of this has been addressed and I may need some help posting links to sources.
Why is there little evidence of civilizations here in the American continent? First, we don’t know how large an area the Book of Mormon people really covered. We know at one point one individual ended up in the New York area but we don’t know where the action took place. Descriptions in the book itself are vague and can be interpreted many ways. Archaeologists are discovering even now buried civilizations in Central and South America. What might come in the future, we don’t know. Beyond the archaeological evidence, though, is a peculiar blessing or curse given to those brought here, according to the Book of Mormon. The promise was those who remained righteous would build a magnificent civilization and legacy. Those who broke their covenants with the Lord would be swept off the land and leave no such legacy. In the words of my electronics engineer husband, to break the covenants was to become a Control-Alt-Delete civilization, leaving not even the memory of magnificence. It doesn’t apply to all peoples who were in the continent, only to those who made the covenant with the Lord. (Now, enlighten me, where is the evidence of the Exodus and the Israelites’ presence in Egypt, of the worldwide flood, of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith.)
The Book of Mormon doesn’t say the Indians have the blood of Book of Mormon people although prophets have said some Indians have descended from Book of Mormon people though no one has said it was a direct line. It doesn’t claim the Indians were solely descended from Book of Mormon people. Nor does the Book of Mormon claim their people were the only inhabitants of the continent, nor, as I indicated earlier, does the Book of Mormon even given us an idea of how large an area was affected/settled by Book of Mormon people.
As to DNA evidence, my understanding is that the evidence is inconclusive if you consider the Book of Mormon people left the Middle East 600 years before the birth of Christ and shortly after the Ten Tribes were lost to record. The Book of Mormon people claimed to be of the Lost Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and other blood, specifically of the inhabitants of Jerusalem of that time (which would have included people probably of every tribe but specifically Judah). Therefore, unless you can pinpoint where the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh ended up after the diaspora, you have a hard time isolating Asians from Middle Easterners.
You mentioned plants and animals that science has shown were not here. I haven’t look at the studies but why should it surprise anyone that flora and fauna change over time. Why are there large ruins of civilizations especially in the Southwest America where there is no evidence of how such civilizations supported themselves? Climate changes. Disease can wipe out people, animals and crops. Again, the Bible suffers from the same kinds of “scientific deficiencies” so why demand the Book of Mormon meet a greater standard than the Bible?
But, without belaboring your objections, I will simply tell you that if one sincerely studies the Book of Mormon and follows the dictates at the end to pray about it, answers come. And they did come to me. In the end, we can only communicate or understand spiritual things by spiritual means. Neither science nor any of its branches like archaeology or DNA studies will ever establish the truth of either the Book of Mormon or the Bible. It will always be a matter of faith. And if I have said I have a personal witness of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, it is mine to claim and none can gainsay. Neither Bible-bashing nor Book of Mormon-bashing will ever convince one of the truth nor destroy a testimony gained by spiritual means.
Sorry - once again the ‘bzzzt’ is on you in the LDS camp - see post #208. Perhaps I should mention again that my wife is LDS...
So, I turned right around and asked her if it was the JST or not.
Her reply, “Well...yes and no...it IS the KJV, but with notes from the prophet, so it is kind of added to, or augmented.”
Evangelizing her heart and mind out of that cult is most certainly a process, but at her heart she is an extremely honest person who loves Christ. She just needs to know the REAL Christ - ie His real character and His True Biblical attributes, and I know she will embrace Him as He will her - and as I do.
I deceive in no wise - definitely never on a level with a certain Mr. Smith of the most questionable character.
I delight in the truth - especially telling the truth about craven liars like Joseph Smith.
Ecclesiates says that there is nothing new under the sun.
Indeed in many ways the fundamentals are not vastly different from a few ancient heresies which are well documented and well refuted.
Specifically, those heresies are Gnosticism (Greek ‘gnosis’ knowledge - which held that salvation was actually dependent upon hidden, or secret knowledge or information in the scriptures - info which was not readily apparent to all - especially the “uninitiated”...) and the “sub” heresy of Arianism, which taught erroneously that Christ was just another brother of us all - including probably Lucifer - and that in substance, He was no different than we, having been made as opposed to “Begotten’.
We know of course that Christ was Begotten, not made. He is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON of G_d. He is the only one of whom it may be said that his mother Mary, was “overshadowed” by the Holy Spirit, and she did conceive in that unique manner.
{There is an interesting word study for all, BTW. Look up the word “overshadowed”. It is replete with meaning, and is incredibly specific and particular in the entire Bible - being used only one other time in that form.}
Both doctrinal concepts were given a very fair airing and trial at the first council of Nicea by Constantine the Great, who was a superb mediator, seeking both political peace in his empire, and communal peace among Christian brethren far and wide in order that the message of Christ might flourish.
It is common for folk looking backward through history to attribute one or the other motive to him, but he was far more intelligent, caring, and enlightened than to be so one-dimensional in his problem solving approach.
A.A.C.
The bom lists the peoples being in millions upon millions. And from sea to sea. I was reading Alma the other day when the Lamanites attacked numbering like the sand. The ruins of those cities should be easily identified along with the swords, shield and assorted armor and other weapons they are reported to have. Smith pointed out places he said were bom locations during the camp far west era.
Archaeologists are discovering even now buried civilizations in Central and South America.
Decades of investigation have identified multiple cultures that spann the bom period - and none of them linked to the bom. The Smithsonian Institution and the National Geographic Society both have pointed out that the bom does not portray events here in the americas. Not one piece of Nephite or other bom society has been found.
The promise was those who remained righteous would build a magnificent civilization and legacy.
Weren't the Nephites those people - and they were slaughtered by the Laminites?
(Now, enlighten me, where is the evidence of the Exodus and the Israelites’ presence in Egypt, of the worldwide flood, of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith.)
Wow, see you start attacking one of your standard works. Regarding Israel and Moses, 4000+ years ago (vs 1400 for the end of the bom era). That said, the customs and laws Moses wrote about in that period have been paralled in other cultures in the area. Going further back, custom of the Pharaoh releasing a prisoner on his birthday has been confirmed from archaeological finds (Genesis 40). Losers normally don't record their losses, so lack of more specific finds is not surprising. The next 40 years were spent nomadically - no buildings to find. Merneptah Stela puts Israel in the promised land as a nation right after conquest. As well as ruin levels in Jericho, Ai and others.
worldwide flood
As a geologist, flood events are difficult to isolate unless well preserved. Archaeological evidence of world wide flood stories strongly infers an event occurred. Again, you are looking at an extremely old event, in comparison to more recent events such as the bom.
of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith
The capital Saul established was at Gibeah, identified as Tell el-Ful, located at the northern outskirts of present-day Jerusalem. The site was excavated by W.F. Albright and was the royal residence of Saul.
All of the locations David fled to from Saul have been located. On July 21, 1993, archaeologists discovered the Tel Dan Stone, the stone mentions Kind David’s dynasty, “the House of David” and dates to the era of David.
Now, these are just a few of the voluminous amounts of archaeological evidences found in Israel. I could also point out the well that David used to enter Jerusalem to conquer it, or Solomon's stables, etc. In fact (not faith), archaeological finds fill museums that are directly related to the bible. Faith has very little to do with it. These artifacts are centuries older than the start of the bom period of Nephi.
Central and south american discoveries pre date and span the bom era in the americas. Again, nothing has been found that can be linked to the bom.
The Book of Mormon doesn’t say the Indians have the blood of Book of Mormon people although prophets have said some Indians have descended from Book of Mormon people though no one has said it was a direct line.
No, lets be very clear. The teaching is that the Laminites, who were descendants of Jews from Israel became the native americans of today.
“And the skins of the Lamanites [Native Americans] were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.” Book of Mormon, Alma, chapter 3, verse 6
To say some is not accurate. President Spencer W. Kimball held the position that all were. The translation by the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed a running history for one thousand years—six hundred years before Christ until four hundred after Christ—a history of these great people who occupied this land for that thousand years. Then for the next fourteen hundred years, they lost much of their high culture. The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here.
The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people ("Of Royal Blood," Ensign, July 1971
Nor does the Book of Mormon claim their people were the only inhabitants of the continent, nor, as I indicated earlier, does the Book of Mormon even given us an idea of how large an area was affected/settled by Book of Mormon people.
Again, argument from silence. However, given the populations mentioned, it extended from sea to sea - which to me indicates a substantial area - and add dozens of major cities, all in contrast to the richness of biblical archeology for even older events.
The Book of Mormon people claimed to be of the Lost Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and other blood, specifically of the inhabitants of Jerusalem of that time (which would have included people probably of every tribe but specifically Judah). Therefore, unless you can pinpoint where the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh ended up after the diaspora, you have a hard time isolating Asians from Middle Easterners.
DNA provides adequate means to separate peoples. And please note too, that anthropological, linguistic and archaeological evidence proves that the native americans are not of Israeli (Semitic) peoples. See peoples carry genetic markers. These markers will not change over time and since it was Nephi's group that populated the americas in 600 BC, those markers will still match those of others in the middle east. Tracking a people group over that period of time has been further prooven by the Lemba people, a tribe in southern Africa. They arrived in S. Africa about the same time Nephi's group did in america. Genetics showed 70% match with current jews, 30% to local tribes (a problem that would not be encountered by Nephi's party - they were the only ones).
You mentioned plants and animals that science has shown were not here. I haven’t look at the studies but why should it surprise anyone that flora and fauna change over time.
OK, since you are not familiar with these -
American Indians had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels before 1492 . . . Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (Information from the National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon ). On the flip side, there is no mention of foods that WERE present such as corn, squash, etc. No mention of other peoples but those descended from Nephite's group.
Again, the Bible suffers from the same kinds of “scientific deficiencies” so why demand the Book of Mormon meet a greater standard than the Bible?
Sorry, as I pointed out above, but will again here - even skeptics acknowledge archaeological support for the bible. Where are the museums full of bom artifacts. I'm not holding the bom to higher critical standards, just to the same standard as the bible.
Neither science nor any of its branches like archaeology or DNA studies will ever establish the truth of either the Book of Mormon or the Bible. It will always be a matter of faith.
The bom makes the claim to represent the actual history in the americas 600 BC - 400 AD. Brigham Young University anthropology professor, Dr. Raymond T. Matheny at an August 25, 1984 Sunstone conference in Salt Lake City made the following observation - ""I would say in evaluating the Book of Mormon that it has no place in the New World whatsoever.""
While archeology cannot directly prove or disprove the spiritual claims of the bom or the Bible. It can evaluate the historical claims which both books make, and that evaluation shows that while the Bible's claim to be authentic history is supported by objective evidence, the same cannot be said for the bom.
Neither Bible-bashing nor Book of Mormon-bashing will ever convince one of the truth nor destroy a testimony gained by spiritual means.
Bible bashing - didn't you make that claim challenging archeology and the bible? The bom makes the claim that can be verified by scientific methods. Every time, the bom has failed that test. You may have faith in a bridge, but if its foundation is flawed, it will collapse when you cross it.
Ya havin' FUN yet??
Duh!!
"It's hard to reason a fellow out of sumpthin' he wuzn't reasoned into in the beginning."
--MormonDude(*)
If the Book of Mormon were found to be a fraud, would you still have faith in Christ?
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.