Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Mormons Think of the Bible
Michael Davis' Virtual Desk ^ | Michael Davis

Posted on 06/23/2009 3:47:53 PM PDT by delacoert

Official Mormon Statements about the Bible:

The Mormon church teaches that the Bible has been corrupted and does not contain the fullness of the gospel. This is reflected in one of their Articles of Faith which states: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly" (Pearl of Great Price).

Comparisons made by Mormon Leaders between the Bible and Book of Mormon. In contrast to the Bible, Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is perfect because it was translated perfectly (miraculously) as reflected in the second half of the same Article of Faith: "...we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God [but without any qualifications as to translation accuracy]" (Pearl of Great Price).



TOPICS: Ecumenism; Other non-Christian
KEYWORDS: antimormonthread; lsd; mormon; mormonism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 last
To: Elsie

The Rosetta stone I believe had the same text body in hieroglyphs, hieratic writing, and Greek and that indicates that hieroglyphs were still either in use or at least understood at an age closer to our own than one might think if he assumes that the pyramids are 4000 - 5500 years old. Heinsohn and Sweeney of course are claiming an age more like 3000 for them.


101 posted on 06/25/2009 8:47:39 AM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

The Book of Abraham for dummies
Says it all!

***

yes it does critics are dummies!


102 posted on 06/25/2009 8:55:30 AM PDT by restornu (Tolerance is a two way street!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Abraham Referenced in Egyptian Papyrus w/ties 2 facsimilie 1

The Book of Abraham for dummies 6

These are supposed to PROVE something?

Hey!

Look over THERE!!


the fact that the papyrus recovered from the collection that Joseph Smith and the Saints obtained doesn’t have the text of the Book of Abraham on it.

103 posted on 06/25/2009 8:59:24 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
It is certainly much closer to the original author's version than the Bible. Of course, we don't have the original copies of the Bible manuscripts, not even copies of the original copies, nor the even copies of those copies.

this is laughable at face value. 4000 changes to a document written in 1830's. Since there are no gold plates to examine, and according to mormon history, the hand written extant first edition 'translations' should be the most perfect. You admit they are not. Isn't the mormon god significant enought to get it right the first time?

No can do. Again your point falls short. What you are providing is the recollection of the scribes on how the text was transmitted to them. I submit this is only speculation on their part on how the translation, as opposed to the transmission, took place.

Ah, good 'ol mormon cognative dissonance. The testimony of the scribes (particularly those who are also the 'witnessess') is only speculation. LOL, how can they speculate on what they 'participated' in, relating their first hand interaction with smith.

You did not provide an account by Joseph Smith on how the translation was accomplished, because there is none available.

I'll let LDS apologist Stephen Ricks answer:
"His reticence was probably well justified and may have been due to the inordinate interest which some of the early Saints had shown in the seer stone or to the negative and sometimes bitter reactions he encountered when he had reported some of his sacred experiences to others."

Again, divination used - NOT translation.

Also, not every word was spelled out, just names the first time they were transmitted to the scribe.

Again, I would refer you to the first hand account by mormon witness Whitmer, endorsed by Elder Nelson previous post.

As a prophet, Joseph certainly had the inspiration to make any corrections to the BofM, and he did.

Then he failed BY THE POWER OF GOD to 'translate it correctly the first time. That does not lend credability to his credentials as a real prophet.

104 posted on 06/25/2009 9:00:54 AM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: restornu
yes it does critics are dummies!

Your most trusted man CRITICIZED all of Christianity!

105 posted on 06/25/2009 9:01:07 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Elsie
Now, however there’s a funerary text with both elements of the snsn papyrus AND a clear reference to Abraham.__

Resty, please read my post more carefully. It is smith's 'translation' mentions Abraham, not the translation by the egyptologist. It sound like you are citing a work by Gee where the word 'Abraham' was found in a papyrus NOT owned by Smith or used for the boa. However another mormon egyptologist Edward H. Ashment refutes Gee in "The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham"

Was Joseph just a good guesser? Is this just a grand coincidence?

Since Abraham is not mentioned, smith is a grand liar

I’m not here to try and prove the Book of Abraham. But this is evidence that the case isn’t as much an ‘open and shut’ instance as the LDS critics would feign it to be

For lurkers, an excellent reference on the boa can be found here:

http://www.bookofabraham.com/

106 posted on 06/25/2009 9:10:39 AM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: varmintman; TheDon
A prophet by definition was getting information directly from God and the idea of having to revise info direct from God involves some kind of a breakdown in logic.

Precisely!

107 posted on 06/25/2009 9:11:55 AM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

yes it does critics are dummies!

Your most trusted man CRITICIZED all of Christianity!

****

The Traditions of men did that...

Just like Obama is obamazing the Contitution!

Joseph Smith was choosen by the Lord Jesus Christ to be his servant not the world Tradition of Men!


108 posted on 06/25/2009 9:15:56 AM PDT by restornu (Tolerance is a two way street!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: varmintman
A prophet by definition was getting information directly from God and the idea of having to revise info direct from God involves some kind of a breakdown in logic.

Joseph was given the ability to translate the BofM. You are ignoring the transmission errors from Joseph to his scribes and from the scribe's copy to the printer's copy and what actually got typeset. No doubt traditional christianity has different notions about prophets and scripture than Mormons. We have first hand experience with prophets and scriptures that you don't. :-)

109 posted on 06/25/2009 9:16:36 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Believe what you want I don’t care for me I am a seeker of the Lord’s TRUTH not traditiion of men!


110 posted on 06/25/2009 9:17:27 AM PDT by restornu (Tolerance is a two way street!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
this is laughable at face value. 4000 changes to a document written in 1830's

Don't worry, give us another 1000 years or so and perhaps we will catch up with the 400,000 variants in the Greek NT!

Then he failed BY THE POWER OF GOD to 'translate it correctly the first time. That does not lend credability to his credentials as a real prophet.

Now who is confusing translation and transmission errors? :-)

111 posted on 06/25/2009 9:19:56 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

There’s one tiny bit of consolation I could offer you, i.e. the fact that the people described in the bom are in good company; it’s becoming increasingly apparent that Charlemagne never existed either. Try doing google searches on ‘charlemagne’, ‘Illig’, and possibly also ‘Heinsohn’....


112 posted on 06/25/2009 10:01:38 AM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Believe what you want I don’t care for me I am a seeker of the Lord’s TRUTH not traditiion of men!

then why are you following joseph smith?

113 posted on 06/25/2009 3:41:54 PM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
this is laughable at face value. 4000 changes to a document written in 1830's
Don't worry, give us another 1000 years or so and perhaps we will catch up with the 400,000 variants in the Greek NT!

Thank you for your admission that the changes in the bom (as recent as within the last decade) are the work of man and not god, therefore smith was not a prophet of god.

Now who is confusing translation and transmission errors? :-)

Must still be you, since there should be NO translation errors from english to english. So you are saying that the only correct and inspired version of the bom is the 1830 first edition, thank you for making my point so well for me.

114 posted on 06/25/2009 3:46:25 PM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Your reply sound like your are being spiteful!


115 posted on 06/25/2009 3:50:06 PM PDT by restornu (Tolerance is a two way street!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Your reply sound like your are being spiteful!

Now really resty, you may be becoming overly sensitive if you consider my question - then why are you following joseph smith? - as spiteful. Remember, this is not for the thin-skinned.

116 posted on 06/25/2009 4:03:20 PM PDT by Godzilla (TEA: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; TheDon
The LDS church is proof positive that most people do not give a rat's rear end about theology. It serves mainly as a support system for middle class people trying to raise children and also as a very necessary counter-force to the power of the US government in areas in which 90% of the land is owned by BLAM. But, ultimately, a religion cannot be founded on provably false ideas like the book of Abraham. Real people and real events leave evidence.

The actual story of the bulk of the people of Israel who the Assyrians carried away in biblical times is here. Again, these people left real traces and real evidence, dres, names, culture in the later Khazer kingdom, a city named Samara on the Volga river etc. etc. etc.

If you care anything about Mormons or the Mormon church you need to work towards getting rid of the bom, "Kolob(TM)", and the rest of the sci-fi theology, ASAP.

117 posted on 06/25/2009 4:23:23 PM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 last

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