Catholic Polygamy

[twopekinguys]

Twopekinguys, Of course we can respond. However, negativity and the constant need you have to attack really discourages me and probably Fatboys from the “discussion”.

At one time I read through a version of the BofM that listed the changes. I had hoped to see something that was significant so that I might better understand this valuable book. However, I was throughly disappointed, almost all the changes were very minor. So the real question revolves around how many significant changes have been made. By this I mean changes that may affect doctrine. Well, there are over 268,000 words in the Book of Mormon, of all these FAIR notes five changes that may be significant:

“the Son of” added to 1 Nephi 11:18; 1 Nephi 11:21, 1 Nephi 11:32, and 1 Nephi 13:40.
“or out of the waters of baptism” added to 1 Nephi 20:1.
“white” changed to “pure” in 2 Nephi 30:6.
“Benjamin” changed to “Mosiah” in Mosiah 21:28 and Ether 4:1.
“Words missing in Alma 32:30”[3] Alma 32:30-31

FAIR explains all these changes in more detail here. They have occurred for various reasons, but I am not worried in the least about these supposed discrepancies. Instead I find it interesting that some cling so tight to the Bible, which has gone through many changes over the centuries, and yet chose to reject the Book of Mormon based on such flimsy arguments. To all such, Mormon himself on the title page of the Book of Mormon says, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.”

Pointing out the truth, and showing the contradictions is not an attack.

You know, this whole persecution card thing has been done before, and is a very old tactic.

You don’t think the two examples given show changes in mormon doctrine? Let alone “significant” changes? Really?

I am amazed at your ability to either fail to realize what these changes show, or your refusal to recognize it.

I am praying twice as hard for you now.

BTW, Bearing your testimony in cases like this is very typical also.

What doctrinal changes in the Bible? Please show me one, just one.

 

[Janderich]

Pointing out the truth, and showing the contradictions is not an attack.

You know, this whole persecution card thing has been done before, and is a very old tactic.

You don’t think the two examples given show changes in Mormon doctrine? Let alone “significant” changes? Really?

I am amazed at your ability to either fail to realize what these changes show, or your refusal to recognize it.

I am praying twice as hard for you now.

BTW, Bearing your testimony in cases like this is very typical also.

What doctrinal changes in the Bible? Please show me one, just one.

Your constant claim that we can’t respond is also extremely tiresome. Perhaps you don’t even notice the tone of your posts.

Researchers have documented thousands of changes to the Bible some significant some not. I have acknowledged changes to the Book of Mormon are you willing to acknowledge changes to the Bible? Let me quote an article about two examples of rather large and significant changes:

Warren [Bill Warren, the New Testament scholar] said the story of the adulterous woman in John’s Gospel, for example, seems to be an account of an actual event preserved and treasured by the Christian community.

“People know it, and they like it,” he said. “It’s about a forgiveness that many times is needed in the church. Can you be forgiven on major sins?”

John had not included it, but Christians wanted to shoehorn it in somewhere, Warren said.

Warren said the story wanders across several early John manuscripts, appearing in a variety of places.

It even shows up in two early copies of Luke. “But probably it was never part of John’s Gospel, in the original form,” he said.

By the 7th century, it had found its current home. It appears today in John 7:53-8:11.

Another change appears in Mark 9:29, when Jesus tells his disciples some demons can be driven out “only by prayer.”

Warren said 3rd century manuscripts added “and fasting” — probably as Christians’ own commentary on the power of that spiritual discipline, which was then becoming standard Christian practice.

In those and other cases, early Christian copiers are probably hoping to clarify a teaching or story for Christian audiences.

In effect, early copiers were taking what modern readers would recognize as study notes and slipping them into the texts, a process that began to tail off around the 9th century, Warren said. nola.com/religion/index.ssf/2011/03/changes_to_the_bible_through_the_ages_are_being_studied_by_new_orleans_scholars.html

 

[twopekinguys]

Your constant claim that we can’t respond is also extremely tiresome. Perhaps you don’t even notice the tone of your posts.

Researchers have documented thousands of changes to the Bible some significant some not. I have acknowledged changes to the Book of Mormon are you willing to acknowledge changes to the Bible? Let me quote an article about two examples of rather large and significant changes:

But you haven’t shown a doctrinal change have you?

It wasn’t that difficult of a request. (or so I thought)

Deflection is extremely tiresome. Persecution complex is extremely tiresome. Bearing of one’s testimony is extremely tiresome.

We have seen it displayed over and over. It is good to know that some stereotypes are true I guess.

I’m sorry, but, your article does not support your point in the slightest.

It implies, and even states that errors were made, but it doesn’t show what the correct content is, or how they concluded that.

So, again, your premise fails.

As far as tone, maybe it is the “tone” that you are trying to read into my posts.

 

[Fatboys]

But you haven’t shown a doctrinal change have you?

It wasn’t that difficult of a request. (or so I thought)

Deflection is extremely tiresome. Persecution complex is extremely tiresome. Bearing of one’s testimony is extremely tiresome.

We have seen it displayed over and over. It is good to know that some stereotypes are true I guess.

I’m sorry, but, your article does not support your point in the slightest.

It implies, and even states that errors were made, but it doesn’t show what the correct content is, or how they concluded that.

So, again, your premise fails.

As far as tone, maybe it is the “tone” that you are trying to read into my posts.

What has been shown is your nastiness over and over again.

 

[twopekinguys]

What has been shown is your nastiness over and over again.

I’m sorry you find honesty and truth nasty.

But as Jharek has stated, we should get back to the topic of the thread.

But yet again, no back up to assertions made. Or have you found a reference for your 99% claim, and I missed it.

 

[Fatboys]

I’m sorry you find honesty and truth nasty.

But as Jharek has stated, we should get back to the topic of the thread.

But yet again, no back up to assertions made. Or have you found a reference for your 99% claim, and I missed it.

If was truth, it would be a bitter pill, but if it was true, you don’t cram it down someones throat either. Even if everything you said was true, I certainly would not join a church that was nasty and so negative and hateful as the one that you belong to. Now I realize that you do not represent the catholic church, but your own attitudes. Thank the Lord for that.

 

[twopekinguys]

If was truth, it would be a bitter pill, but if it was true, you don’t cram it down someones throat either. Even if everything you said was true, I certainly would not join a church that was nasty and so negative and hateful as the one that you belong to. Now I realize that you do not represent the catholic church, but your own attitudes. Thank the Lord for that.

Another typical mormon tactic. I have seen this many times. Right along with the persecution card we see so much of.

Attack the person, and not what was said.

Have you stopped to think that maybe you are just reading more into what has been said, than was really there?

The hardest thing people have to face in life is the truth. Trust me, as a convert myself, I know the feelings you are having.

Everything you have known or learned from being a mormon is being shot down, with references and supporting documentation.

It is a hard pill to swallow.

Think about it.

I’m praying for you.

 

[RebeccaJ]

If was truth, it would be a bitter pill, but if it was true, you don’t cram it down someones throat either. Even if everything you said was true, I certainly would not join a church that was nasty and so negative and hateful as the one that you belong to. Now I realize that you do not represent the catholic church, but your own attitudes. Thank the Lord for that.

How do you cram something down someone throat, using the internet?



Are you just making excuses to not listen?

 

[Fatboys]

How do you cram something down someone throat, using the internet?



Are you just making excuses to not listen?

You do have a sense of humor. I have done this for more years than I care to admitt. When I first got into apologetics I was very animated and not very tolerant. So sometimes when someone asks a question that I have answered thousands of times I tend to act like I don’t care. And that is a human fraility. Now there are posts that I just miss. And I am way to busy to go back and read them all to find out where I did miss them.

 

[Fatboys]

I have already stated that I disagreed with the OP. And that is up to the person that started it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

You do have a sense of humor. I have done this for more years than I care to admitt. When I first got into apologetics I was very animated and not very tolerant. So sometimes when someone asks a question that I have answered thousands of times I tend to act like I don’t care. And that is a human fraility. Now there are posts that I just miss. And I am way to busy to go back and read them all to find out where I did miss them.

Well Fatboys, I’ve done this for years too. So-called Mormon apologetics is to me, irrational and illogical. I think if I were you, I would be exhausted.

I’m not interested in Mormon apologetics.

Jesus interests me. Mormon apologetics doesn’t have much to say. I’d say, I was done with it when the apologetics became, “what is important to your salvation?” There isn’t anything in Mormonism that is important to my salvation.

 

[Porknpie]

I suggested so too in post 249…

I thnk it would be great if Fatboys started a new post on a subject of his choice. I give him a lot of credit for posting on CAF and his decision to return after saying he was going to leave, this takes some courage.

Notre Dame now 9-0. :irish2: Went to the game yesterday that went to 3OT …I’m drained. I look forward to me morming :coffeeread: Oh and we beat BYU this year too.

 

[Fatboys]

I suggested so too in post 249…

I thnk it would be great if Fatboys started a new post on a subject of his choice. I give him a lot of credit for posting on CAF and his decision to return after saying he was going to leave, this takes some courage.

Notre Dame now 9-0. :irish2: Went to the game yesterday that went to 3OT …I’m drained. I look forward to me morming :coffeeread: Oh and we beat BYU this year too.

Our church is true, but the football team has some real work to beat ND

 

[RebeccaJ]

Our church is true, but the football team has some real work to beat ND

I’d say your church has some real work to beat Our Lady.

 

[Porknpie]

I’d say your church has some real work to beat Our Lady.

And even more work to beat touchdown Jesus!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notre_Dame_Stadium

 

[twopekinguys]

And even more work to beat touchdown Jesus!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notre_Dame_Stadium

I thought this was “Touchdown Jesus”?


Unfortunately, he got hit by lightning in 2010, and burst into flames.

Not sure if that means anything.

 

[Fatboys]

I thought this was “Touchdown Jesus”?
http://www.conanorbust.com/sites/default/files/imce/touchdown+jesus+1.jpg

Unfortunately, he got hit by lightning in 2010, and burst into flames.

Not sure if that means anything.

Now that is funny

 

[CopticChristian]

That is okay. I was not trying to convince you to change your mind, but to understand why I believe it was restored. And if I only read what people who wrote about Joseph Smith that literally hated him, I would probably have the same opinion. But anti mormons have only one goal. That is to destroy the mormon church. I have caught them in lies and deceit. And when correcting them, they still bring up the same old tired worn out lies. Anything goes in the name of Jesus. In all the women Joseph Smith was suppose to had sex with, there is not one child born from these women. NOT ONE. The only children he had was through his first wife Emma. Look the only person that was perfect on this earth was Christ. Yet those who do not believe in him called him a liar, deceitful, and everything else. Yet if you look at the fruits that Christ gave to us, we know this is not true. Joseph Smith was far from perfect just as any other prophet, but like the other prophets you look at the fruits that have come forth.

Fat,

I am not interested in destroying anything…I am addicted to the truth however…and when I read in Deuterotomy

You may say in your heart, ‘How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ 22“When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

and when I read in Alma

“And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost,*,and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God” (Alma 7:10).

This causes me heartburn…because it is not true…and if it ain’t true then the book ain’t true and its source should be questioned…

 

[Fatboys]

Fat,

I am not interested in destroying anything…I am addicted to the truth however…and when I read in Deuterotomy

and when I read in Alma

This causes me heartburn…because it is not true…and if it ain’t true then the book ain’t true and its source should be questioned…

get your nose out of the material that does not promote anything but hate. (i did not say anti mormon)

As I have said Joseph Smith translated it through his understanding and knowledge. Jesus was born in Bethleham, in the land of Jerusalum. That is what the ancients actually called the area. When I tell people I am from Utah, they aske where and I tell them near the largest city, and sometimes I say that I am from around SLC

 

[CopticChristian]

get your nose out of the material that does not promote anything but hate. (i did not say anti mormon)

As I have said Joseph Smith translated it through his understanding and knowledge. Jesus was born in Bethleham, in the land of Jerusalum. That is what the ancients actually called the area. When I tell people I am from Utah, they aske where and I tell them near the largest city, and sometimes I say that I am from around SLC

Fat,

You say my nose is where?

Fat Boy say what…?

He be speaking to me…?

Well there are a few difficulties…

Where is Jerusalem ever described as a “land” in the Scriptures? The expression “land of Jerusalem” never occurs in the sixty-six books of the Bible. The fact is, Matthew, an inspired apostle, explicitly states that Bethlehem is in “the land of Judah” (Matthew 2:6; cf. Luke 2:4). Judah is the “land”; Jerusalem is a “city” (cf. Zechariah 8:3; Matthew 5:35); and so is Bethlehem (Luke 2:4). There is precision of Matthew’s descriptions elsewhere in the same chapter. Twice he refers to the “land of Israel” (2:20-21), and then to the “city of Nazareth” (v. 23). Unlike Joseph Smith, the biblical writers did not confuse “land” and “city.”

also…

If Alma, supposedly writing about 83 B.C., employed the word “Ghost,” in the passage then it should be noted that the word “ghost” was not even fashioned until the 15th century A.D. (Joseph Shipley, Dictionary of Word Origins, New York: Philosophical Library, 1945, p. 165).

So, you be from the land of Utah…or the land of Salt Lake in and around the land of Utah?

Now is you is or is you not mistaken…?