15 Nov 10
Originally posted by reinfeldI thought when there were differances in belief between the Book of Mormon and the Bible happened the Mormons would usually lean toward the Book of Mormon. Is that correct?
a true church of the christ.
( islam is a religion created by a pedophile and murderer ).
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by galveston75Differences?? Mormons use both books and when one reads the Book of Mormon ( as I have done) it is rather amazing how it mirrors much of the Bible. It even is written in old English, like the original Kings James version. Which proves that old English has been spoken for thousands of years and is not native to Britain at all. Actually whenever facts change biblically the Book of Mormon is changed. Something to do with the Umma and Thumin I think.
I thought when there were differances in belief between the Book of Mormon and the Bible happened the Mormons would usually lean toward the Book of Mormon. Is that correct?
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by caissad4According to the undisputed inerrant fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon):
It even is written in old English, like the original Kings James version. Which proves that old English has been spoken for thousands of years and is not native to Britain at all.
The Book of Mormon is a sacred text of the Latter Day Saint movement. It was first published in March 1830 by Joseph Smith, Jr. as The Book of Mormon: An Account Written by the Hand of Mormon upon Plates Taken from the Plates of Nephi.[1] According to Smith's account, and also according to the book's narrative, the Book of Mormon was originally written in otherwise unknown characters referred to as "reformed Egyptian" engraved on golden plates. Smith said that he received these plates in 1827 from an angel named Moroni,[2] whom Smith identified as a resurrected[3] indigenous American who had written and abridged parts of the book over a millennium ago. According to Smith, Moroni had buried the plates in a stone box, along with other ancient artifacts,[4] in a hill near Smith's home in Manchester, New York.
So, if this article is to be believed, it was originally written in some form of egyptian language and was not translated into Old English until 1830. What do you count as 'Old English' anyway? I doubt that the language Joseph Smith used would have been the same as Shakespear for instance.
(note that I have not read or even seen the book of mormon and have only spent 10 minutes Googling it so please don't think I even consider myself as authoritative, let alone that I might think that you should)
--- Penguin.
16 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by PenguinHere are a few links relative to the origins of that most holy book of Mormon:
According to the undisputed inerrant fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon):
The Book of Mormon is a sacred text of the Latter Day Saint movement. It was [b]first published in March 1830 by Joseph Smith, Jr. as The Book of Mormon: An Account Written by the Hand of Mormon upon Plates Taken from the Plates of r myself as authoritative, let alone that I might think that you should)
--- Penguin.[/b]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spalding%E2%80%93Rigdon_theory_of_Book_of_Mormon_authorship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_Unvailed
http://solomonspalding.com/index3.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/az2/arizonadry/truth/spalding.html
http://www.archive.org/details/themanuscriptsto00spauuoft
16 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinThe Mormons have exact the same right to call whatever book they want as holy or sacred as christians, jews, moslems, buddhists, hindus, and whoever have.
According to the undisputed inerrant fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon):
The Book of Mormon is a sacred text of the Latter Day Saint movement. It was first published in March 1830 by Joseph Smith, Jr. as The Book of Mormon: An Account Written by the Hand of Mormon upon Plates Taken from the Plates of r myself as authoritative, let alone that I might think that you should)
--- Penguin.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasexcept there are subtle differences.
The Mormons have exact the same right to call whatever book they want as holy or sacred as christians, jews, moslems, buddhists, hindus, and whoever have.
comparing mormonism with christianity is like comparing star wars fan fiction with frank herbert's dune
16 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasthey have the right, does not mean that its inspired, though. Indeed whereas the bible itself accurately portrays events, with dates, rulers, places, the book of mormon contains fictional portions unsupported or corroborated by history and archaeology. As Zhalansi states, its apples and oranges.
The Mormons have exact the same right to call whatever book they want as holy or sacred as christians, jews, moslems, buddhists, hindus, and whoever have.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI almost fell off my chair laughing at that one.
they have the right, does not mean that its inspired, though. Indeed whereas the bible itself accurately portrays events, with dates, rulers, places, the book of mormon contains fictional portions unsupported or corroborated by history and archaeology. As Zhalansi states, its apples and oranges.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasAack. More unsupported crap bubbling forth from the putrid open sewer. Give it a rest, will ya? Until such time as you're able (not just willing) to put forward an actual refutation of any biblical account, stuff it.
The Mormons have exact the same right to call whatever book they want as holy or sacred as christians, jews, moslems, buddhists, hindus, and whoever have.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt's been done so many times, so do I really have to?
Aack. More unsupported crap bubbling forth from the putrid open sewer. Give it a rest, will ya? Until such time as you're able (not just willing) to put forward an actual refutation of any biblical account, stuff it.
(*yawn*) What about genisis?
But let's not get off topic here. As long as there are fredom of religion, meaning you can have any religion you want, you have respect others for their choice of religion, as you want to be respected for yours.
Btw, I didn't show any negative opinion about the bible in my posting, did I? So exactly what did you react on?
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThey have the right to believe what they want, exatly like you. I don't compare apples with oranges, I compare peoples right to have the right to chose their own religion, exactly as you have. I treat others as I wanted to be treated myself. So said Jesus, so says I.
they have the right, does not mean that its inspired, though. Indeed whereas the bible itself accurately portrays events, with dates, rulers, places, the book of mormon contains fictional portions unsupported or corroborated by history and archaeology. As Zhalansi states, its apples and oranges.
16 Nov 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasok 🙂
They have the right to believe what they want, exatly like you. I don't compare apples with oranges, I compare peoples right to have the right to chose their own religion, exactly as you have. I treat others as I wanted to be treated myself. So said Jesus, so says I.