Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Difficult Questions for Mormons
The Interactive Bible ^

Posted on 12/01/2010 6:28:46 PM PST by delacoert

  1. Why did the angel take Nephi Plates back to heaven? Do they not belong with man? Would not their existence prove once for all that Mormonism is truth? God allowed the Jews to carry the 10 commandments for several centuries in their original physical form, written by the finger of God Himself!
  2. "Will you, as a Mormon, please read the Bible cover to cover and ask God to reveal to you that it contains all of God's message to man and that parts are not lost or altered and that the Book of Mormon is false?"
  3. If the original 1830 Book of Mormon was inspired than why were there so many errors and changes and additions and deletions, when compared to current editions?
  4. How can we be assured that the translation of the B of M into French or any other language is correct? Only the English translation is claimed to be inspired!
  5. How do you account for the stunning parallels in both content and order between the B of M and the View of the Hebrews, by Ethan Smith? Published in 1823 (7 years before the B of M) less than 100 miles from the Joseph Smith's parents home.
  6. Mormon Article of Faith #8: "We Believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." Why do you only add the phrase, "as far as it is translated correctly" to describe the Bible and not after the book of Mormon when in fact there are far more translating errors in the Book of Mormon than the Bible?
  7. If the Book of Mormon is true, then why has the Mormon church changed it? Examples are: 1 Nephi 11:21; 19:20; 20:1 and Alma 29:4. Compare these with the original Book of Mormon. (Gerald and Sandra Tanner have counted 3913 changes in the book of Mormon, excluding punctuation changes.)
  8. How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighed about 230 lbs. Gold, with a density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lbs. per cubic foot. The plates were 7" x 8" by about 6". See Articles of Faith, by Talmage, page 262, 34th ed.)
  9. If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (Doc. & Cov. 132:17,37)
  10. Why do Mormons emphasize part of the Word of Wisdom and ignore the part forbidding the eating of meat except in winter, cold or famine? (Doc. & Cov. 89:12,13).
  11. When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days or for three hours? (Luke 23:44 and 3 Nephi 8:19, 23).
  12. Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to Heaven? (The Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 3, pages 263-264. See repreint in Mormonism --Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, page 4.)
  13. Joseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original No. 11 been omitted? (Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 2, three pages after page 160, among the photos.)
  14. Why did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever? (Doc. & Cov. 124:56-60).
  15. How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood? (Numbers 16:40; Heb. 7:13,14).
  16. Since Mormonism teaches that only God the Father had a physical body at the time Adam was created, why did God say, "Let us make man in OUR image"? Why didn't He say, "Let us make man in MY image?" (Gen. 1:26).
  17. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, page 50).
  18. How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon's while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple? (1 Kings 5:13-18 and 2 Nephi 5:15-17).
  19. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doc. & Cov. 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324).
  20. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made (Gen. 3:21). Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons in the secret temple ceremonies?
  21. How do you explain the fact that 2 Nephi 16:2 is copied from an older version of the KJV of the Bible in Isa 6:2? This is proven because this older KJV (the mistake is corrected in current versions) made a rare gramatical error by using the incorrect plural form of "seraphims" rather than "seraphim".


TOPICS: Other non-Christian
KEYWORDS: inmam; inman; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 last
To: T Minus Four

Ya think?

LOL

;-)


161 posted on 12/06/2010 12:58:47 PM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

LOL! Running a little behind today :-)


162 posted on 12/06/2010 1:12:11 PM PST by T Minus Four (Duh. We were talking about in the old days or not-so-distant old days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: T Minus Four

I’m sure glad you have all proved my original post so totally wrong. No self-congratulatory echo chambers here. Move along.


163 posted on 12/06/2010 5:13:31 PM PST by nando9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: nando9

Stick around NooB, your skin will get thicker I imagine.

164 posted on 12/06/2010 6:29:42 PM PST by T Minus Four (Duh. We were talking about in the old days or not-so-distant old days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

Hey nana. Spiritual noob here. Since you appear to be the scholar in these parts, I had to turn to others to question your interesting though philologically loosey-goosey treatise on what the Urim and Thummim were or weren’t.

There just so happens to be a book, authored by a scholar not connected in any way with those dang mormons, considered by other scholars to be the singular modern treatment of this topic. I’m sure you’ve read it, but just in case here is a short review by another not-dang mormon. You will find his conclusions quite fascinating, I’m sure, particularly as to their use in receiving and disseminating revelatory guidance and answers. Weird.

Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, The
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Sep 1999 Review by Harbin, Michael A

(The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel. By Cornelis Van Dam. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1997, 296 pp., $34.50.)

“Urim” and “Thummim” (UT) are the Hebrew names for the object or objects used by the OT high priest to determine God’s will for the Israelites. Their actual identity has puzzled scholars for centuries. They are not described. Their method of use is not explained. The etymology of the terms is at best uncertain. Even their mention in the OT is somewhat haphazard. Still, scholarly consensus has concluded that they are some form of “lot oracle” and for that reason, no detailed study of the UT has appeared since 1824. Van Dam asserts, however, that the lot theory does not satisfy all of the evidence and undertakes a new exhaustive examination of the issue.

Van Dam begins with a study of the history of interpretation. He performs a topical overview, which surveys the various interpretations from the time of Philo to date and evaluates the different theories.

From this, Van Dam turns to the ancient Near East to explore possible analogues. First he explores lot oracles and notes that the use of lot oracles in the ancient Near East seems to be less common than supposed, and that there is no real analogy to the UT. The same is true with teraphim, which he covers very briefly as associated with the UT. He then examines in more detail analogies that have been proposed by region: Mesopotamia, Hatti, Ugarit, Egypt, Arabia and even China. While he notes items of dress in these cultures that may be compared to the ephod of the priest (which held the UT), he does not find any comparable method of revelation. With this foundation, he begins to repudiate the lot-oracle concept.

After a chapter on the history of translation, Van Dam arrives at the heart of his work, the biblical usages. He surveys the UT within the context of divine revelation in general and notes that God used a variety of methods to provide revelation to Israel, and encouraged the people to inquire of him for guidance. This was tempered with a stringent prohibition against divination of any type, specifically including teraphim and apparently lot oracles. Van Dam argues that the UT could not be lot oracles since on several of the occasions we find it used, the answers recorded exceed the possible yes/no responses of the lots.

Drawing upon the traditional translation of “light(s) and perfection(s)” evidenced in ancient Jewish tradition and the LXX, as well as the role performed by the high priest who was entrusted with the use of the UT, Van Dam concludes that the UT was used to validate a prophetic statement from the high priest as true revelation from God. He argues that the UT was some type of stone that would illuminate (with “true” or “perfect” light) when removed from the ephod to verify the divine source of a declaration (p. 224).

So, what happened to the UT? Here, Van Dam is more tentative. He concludes that the UT were not used after David, probably because of priestly unfaithfulness, although he also sees a role for increasing written revelation that supplanted the need for immediate revelation. Tied in with priestly unfaithfulness, he also notes a parallel increase in the prophetic office.

Although many questions are left unanswered, overall, this is an excellent survey of a very important, although obscure, facet of OT worship. Van Dam has provided a very thorough and readable compilation of the material available on the subject. His conclusions, although not completely new, are thought-provoking as they tie together the spiritual and physical realms.

Michael A. Harbin

Taylor University, Upland, IN


165 posted on 12/07/2010 8:04:57 PM PST by nando9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 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