Mormons (LDS) Know More About Bible Than Other Christians

Atheists and agnostics know more about major world religions than many people of faith, while Mormons can answer more Bible questions than their Catholic and mainline Protestant counterparts.

Those are among the somewhat startling conclusions about religious literacy in America the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life drew after surveying 3,412 Americans.

Some of the multiple-choice questions were relatively simple: Where was Jesus born and who led the exodus from Egypt? What religion was Mother Teresa, what day does the Jewish Sabbath begin and what is the name of Islam’s holy book?

Others were more obscure: What is Indonesia’s dominant religion? Which Christians teach that salvation comes through faith alone?

About half the Protestants (53 percent) couldn’t correctly identify Martin Luther as the person whose writings and actions inspired the Protestant Reformation. Fewer than half of Americans (47 percent) knew the Dalai Lama is Buddhist and only 38 percent correctly associated Vishnu and Shiva with Hinduism.

John Morehead, director of the Western Institute for Intercultural Studies in Salt Lake City, had already noted religious illiteracy in the general population as well as in the evangelical community. But he did not expect Mormons to top them in their biblical fluency.

“Mormons tend to emphasize Mormon scriptures like the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible in their devotional life,” Morehead said in an e-mail.

It is precise in every way this includes prophecy. [Cold Steel Talon]

Ohhh... Well.. let's take a look at that statement. Acts 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. Acts 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. Acts 26:13 - 14 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Three different and contradictory accounts of the same event... in your Bible... That doesn't look all that precise to me. [Stourme]

Could it be because you haven't taken the time to study how precise these verses are, Stourme?
I mean, could it possibly be, Stourme, that you're more interesting in slamming the Bible as a Mormon instead of studying it carefully?
Could it be, Stourme, that you're more interested in judging the Biblical writers and preservers of the Bible through the generations than actually honoring them?

Stourme concludes these contradict because

(a) Paul's companions saw no man (Acts 9:7), apparently standing speechless;
(b) Paul's companions heard no specific voice (Acts 22:9);
(c) Paul's companions hit the deck, and Paul says he saw the light & heard a voice (Acts 26:13-14)

So what are the alleged "contradictions?"

First of all, none of the alleged "contradictions" involve the apostle Paul's reactions. They are consistently recorded:

All three of Paul's accounts about how he responded ARE THE SAME -- so will Stourme first actually acknowledge that?
* Did he fall to the ground? (Yes, all three accounts say he does)
* He saw a light (Acts 9:7; Acts 22:6,11; 26:13 -- which his companions saw, too -- 22:9)...and since this light that flashed around him was "brighter than the sun" -- 26:13 -- I think we can safely assume everybody saw this light!)
* Did he hear a distinct voice giving a thought-conveying message? (Yes, all three accounts say so, including even Acts 9 -- 9:4...Acts 26 says it was in Aramaic)

So, the alleged contradictions center around Paul's traveling companions:
(1) Did they stand speechless as a reaction (Acts 9:7); or hit the deck? (Acts 26:14)
(2) What did they see? A man or personage or none at all? (Acts 9:7) A light (Acts 22:9; 26:13)?
(3) What did they hear? Did they hear? (Acts 9:7) Or not hear? (Acts 22:9)

Surely if we study these, we can find out whether they hit the deck or not, what they saw or didn't see, and what they heard?

Q 1 To re-emphasize Paul's reaction, did he hit the deck?
A 1 Yes, all three Acts accounts say he did...including Acts 9:4 and 22:7
Q 2 Well, what about his companions...all except Acts 9:7 seem to indicate they joined him on the ground? So does Acts 26:14 contradict Acts 9:7?
A 2 No. Why not? As one commentator (John W. Haley, source below) says: "...the word rendered 'stood' also means to be fixed, to be rooted to the spot. Hense, the sense may be, not that they stood erect, but that they were rendered motionless, or fixed to the spot, by overpowering fear." I might say "I stood perfectly still" -- and not even be standing.
Source: John Wesley Haley, An Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, p. 359 Go here for online book Note: I've incorporated Haley addressing other aspects of Acts' verses into the rest of my response below.

Q 3 What about on what they saw? Do they harmonize?
A 3 Yes.
Q 4 How so?
A 4 Well, Stourme fails to address the basic Q of whether or not they Saw something or someone? (Of course, they saw at least something)
Q 5 What did Paul's companions see? Did they see any man or personage?
A 5 No, they did not see any MAN or PERSONAGE per Acts 9:7.
Q 6 Did they see a "light"?
A 6 Yes they did, per Acts 22:9.
Q 7 Does that contradict?
A 7 No, men aren't usually the source of pure light "brighter than the sun," (Acts 26:13) now are they?

Q 8 Last series of Q's: Did his companions hear something? Did they hear a voice?
A 8 Yes, when you include the NIV version of Acts 22:9, all three passages say they did: 9My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me.

(This is where Stourme needs a "grammar lesson")

Acts 9:7: Hearing a voice (Greek, akouontes...tes phontes...genitive case in Gr. grammar).
Acts 22:9: Paul says companions "heard not the voice" (Greek, ten...phonen ouk ekousan...accusative case in Gr. grammar).

First, what's the difference of the two Greek verbs definition-wise?
akouo -- "to hear" may indicate the ability to hear sound or to understand...Context: Greek grammar indicates that they heard but did not understand.
phonen with "not" in 22:9 indicates that they did not hear well enough to understand.
In summary, the Greek indicates harmony between the two accounts.

Greek grammar & nuances play a key role in the distinctions:
'Tis difference between you, Stourme, hearing a sound--even the sound of a voice (the genitive case) -- Acts 9 -- and actually understanding it! (the accusative case) -- Acts 22

Akouo's meaning ranges anything from hearing a noise, hearing a report, to understanding! How many of us, for example, have heard a "report" -- a bang -- but because of being a "lay" person w/regard to gunfire couldn't distinguish it between a gun shot or a firework? You or I may have heard a noise (a "report"), but that might be different than a co-worker giving you a perfectly understandable one-line "report." Grammar context in this case is everything...'tis not only true with the Greek word for hear, but English grammar does this exact same thing with the words "to hear"/"heard"]

Illustration:
Genitive case: "The sound of your voices heard last night by the kids kept them awake in the next room."
Accusative case: "I heard your voice last night; I relayed to others what you sounded off on."
In the first case -- the genitive -- just because the voices kept up the kids doesn't mean they understood what was being said or that they were even keenly listening in.
Another example: I may be 1 1/2 football fields away from a well-trained K-9, who I tell to go "sick" somebody according to command in a triangular direction from both of us. I may say, "Bowser, sick! Bowser, sick! Bowser, do you hear me?" Now, whether Bowser runs to me or to the "target" shows both "sides" of "hear." If Bowser was close enough to hear my command, he'll attack the target. That is, Bowser understood my thought-conveying message. If I put that into a sentence, it will be in the accusative case. If Bowser only heard my voice, but not the specific command, he might respond by running my way, hearing my generic call. In both cases, Bowser heard me: But what he heard in the latter case would be framed in genitive grammar. This is true for these same words grammar-wise, whether we're talking English or Greek.

Q 9 Is there another example of this being done in Scripture?
A 9 Yes -- see John 12:28, where the crowd heard the sound of the Father talking to the Son, but what was their perception? Did they hear the thought-conveying message that the Father was giving to the Son? No! (They thought it was thunder!) Just like the Son in John 12:28, Acts 9:4, 22:7, and 26:14 all make it clear that only Paul heard the thought-conveying message.

So if Stourme believes that Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9 contradict on what they all heard, then he'd have to be consistent and say John 12:28 is a "contradiction," too...why would some only hear generic thunderous noise...whereas others heard a specific phrase from God the Father???

Makes perfect NON-sense...

False prophecies of Joseph Smith

History of the Church
1. Prophecy about Jesus' return within 56 years - "President Smith then stated that the meeting had been called, because God had commanded it; and it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit. He then gave a relation of some of the circumstances attending us while journeying to Zion--our trials, sufferings; and said God had not designed all this for nothing, but He had it in remembrance yet; and it was the will of God that those who went to Zion, with a determination to lay down their lives, if necessary, should be ordained to the ministry, and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh--even fifty-six years should wind up the scene." (History of the Church, vol. 2, p. 189). See context.
  1. Jesus did not return within fifty-six years when 1891 arrived.
Doctrine and Covenants
1. Prophecy that the temple would be built in Missouri within Smith's Generation - "Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion,ⁱ which shall be the city of New Jerusalem. ³ Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased. ⁴ Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. ⁵ For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house...³¹ Therefore, as I said concerning the sons of Moses for the sons of Moses and also the sons of Aaron shall offer an acceptable offering and sacrifice in the house of the Lord, which house shall be built unto the Lord in this generation, upon the consecrated spot as I have appointed."(Doctrines and Covenants 84:2-5,31.) See context.
  1. The Mormons were driven out of Jackson County in 1833. They were not gathered there in accordance to this prophecy dealing with building the temple.
  2. The prophecy clearly states that the generation present when the prophecy was given would not pass away until the temple was built at the western boundaries of the state of Missouri which is in Independence. This clearly failed.
2. All Nations would be involved in the American Civil War - "Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls; ² And the time will come that war will be poured out upon all nations, beginning at this place. ³ For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations," (Doctrine and Covenants 87:1-3). See context
  1. This is clearly another false prophecy since all nations did not get involved in the American Civil War.
3. Prophesy that the earth will tremble and the sun be hidden in "not many days": "For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree," (Doctrine and Covenants 88:87) See context
  1. The sun hasn't yet been hidden nor has the moon hidden its face.
  2. This prophecy was given on 12/27/1832. "Not many days hence"? Since the writing of this article on 6/22/06, it has been 63,364 days or 173 years, 5 months, 26 days. I think that 63,364 days is more than "not many days".
    1. For reference to January 1, 2000 it was 61,000 days (even), or 167 years, 5 days.
Pearl of Great Price
1. Prophecy that Isaiah 11 was about to be fulfilled - "In addition to these, he quoted the eleventh chapter of Isaiah, saying that it was about to be fulfilled. He quoted also the third chapter of Acts, twenty-second and twenty-third verses, precisely as they stand in our New Testament. He said that that prophet was Christ; but the day had not yet come when 'they who would not hear his voice should be cut off from among the people,' but soon would come," (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith, History, verse 40). See context
  1. Isaiah 11:6-9 says, "And the wolf will dwell with the lamb, And the leopard will lie down with the kid, And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little boy will lead them. ⁷Also the cow and the bear will graze; Their young will lie down together; And the lion will eat straw like the ox. ⁸And the nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, And the weaned child will put his hand on the viper's den. ⁹They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord As the waters cover the sea."
    1. This has not yet been fulfilled. The wolf is not dwelling with the lamb, the calf and the lion are not together, nor are the cow and bear grazing together. The lion is not eating straw like an ox. Nursing children are not playing in the dens of cobras.

http://carm.org/false-prophecies-of-joseph-smith

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.