LDS and ancient record...

[TexanKnight]

I wouldn’t base my understanding of all Mormons on second-hand stories told by adolescent girls. In most areas, early-morning seminary is taught by lay members of my church, who may or may not know what they’re talking about on every gospel-related topic.

I have no doubt that the wine referred to in Bible was alcoholic. It makes no difference to me. The Word of Wisdom (Section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants) is a modern revelation, so it has nothing to do with the New Testament.

Could you please explain this:

Every Catholic I met in two years in South Texas knew nothing about his/her church. Not wrong things – nothing. Should I mold my opinion of Catholicism based on that?

Please prove your contention. It seems highly unlikely that EVERY Catholic had no knowledge. Or that you met a Catholic and spent the next while asking them everything they know…or that your knowledge was good enough to know they did not know. More importantly, why you felt the need to dodge the point by pointing the fingers at others.

Lefty, your conduct here has certainly inspired me to pray for you. You do not appear to follow the teachings of Christ, though you DO follow the teachings of Joseph and Brigham. You belittle people, mock people, and use sarcasm to mask your shortcomings.

I will make it a point to pray for you daily.

Have a Happy New Year

 

[Lefty0908]

~continued from above~

I did a little searching on the New Advent website and found a few things that indicate what criteria should be considered. Since those perspectives are all from a strictly Catholic POV, because the Church doesn’t recognize any other sources of visions, you might not accept them as relevant to JS, but they do give some idea of the kinds of things that are considered in all Catholic visionaries. (Then you gave me the extensive criteria that I don’t need to quote again here).

So, Telstar, I was kind of enjoying our discussion on the BOM witnesses because it actually had something to do with the theme of this thread (a rarity on this website! :sad_yes. Hopefully we can get back to the topic, but before that I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate the information you gave me on the criteria the RCC uses to distinguish real visions and revelations from those that are false or deceptive. Of course it’s quite foreign to me and as you indicated, I don’t find it acceptable to my understanding of revelation. Nonetheless, I respect the underlying spiritual principles that seem to be guiding the RCC leaders in making these assessments and certainly respect your openness with me in sharing them.

As to our discussion about the witnesses of the plates that were translated into the Book of Mormon, I don’t find your arguments against their straightforward testimonies very compelling, and by the same token, you say the same about what I have presented. Imagine that! The “dupes and stooges” theory of these men just doesn’t wash with what I have come to know about their lives both in and out of my church as well as the consistency with which they gave their witness throughout the years. But I think we might be through with that particular subject unless we now start to go around in circles.

So how about this: You seem to have some knowledge of the BOM. It certainly can’t be disputed that the thing exists. So if Joseph Smith’s story of how it was produced is bogus, what’s your theory of how the Book of Mormon came into being?

 

[Jerusha]

You seem to have some knowledge of the BOM. It certainly can’t be disputed that the thing exists. So if Joseph Smith’s story of how it was produced is bogus, what’s your theory of how the Book of Mormon came into being?

As I told MormonCultist I would suggest that you delve into the archives here. We really don’t need to go over that discussion again, unless you are able to bring up some new angles, which I would enjoy.

Telstar is a relative newcomer, and probably is not aware of the extensive debates we have had on the subject. I appreciate his valuable contributions to our team effort.

 

[Miriam1947]

So, Telstar, I was kind of enjoying our discussion on the BOM witnesses because it actually had something to do with the theme of this thread (a rarity on this website! :sad_yes. Hopefully we can get back to the topic, but before that I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate the information you gave me on the criteria the RCC uses to distinguish real visions and revelations from those that are false or deceptive. Of course it’s quite foreign to me and as you indicated, I don’t find it acceptable to my understanding of revelation. Nonetheless, I respect the underlying spiritual principles that seem to be guiding the RCC leaders in making these assessments and certainly respect your openness with me in sharing them.

As to our discussion about the witnesses of the plates that were translated into the Book of Mormon, I don’t find your arguments against their straightforward testimonies very compelling, and by the same token, you say the same about what I have presented. Imagine that! The “dupes and stooges” theory of these men just doesn’t wash with what I have come to know about their lives both in and out of my church as well as the consistency with which they gave their witness throughout the years. But I think we might be through with that particular subject unless we now start to go around in circles.

So how about this: You seem to have some knowledge of the BOM. It certainly can’t be disputed that the thing exists. So if Joseph Smith’s story of how it was produced is bogus, what’s your theory of how the Book of Mormon came into being?

Lefty weren’t you Catholic before you left the Church and decided to become Mormon?

How did that happen?

 

[Lefty0908]

As I told MormonCultist I would suggest that you delve into the archives here. We really don’t need to go over that discussion again, unless you are able to bring up some new angles, which I would enjoy.

Telstar is a relative newcomer, and probably is not aware of the extensive debates we have had on the subject. I appreciate his valuable contributions to our team effort.

That’s fine. I’m not interested in the archives. There’s really not that much that’s new in the world of BOM criticism. And I’m a visitor here and want to be a semi-good citizen. I was just trying to get back to a topic at least tangentially related to the beginning posts which questioned whether or not the BOM could be considered a translated document of ancient origin. It seems as though that’s been dodged of late.

And not to worry, I’m entirely at peace in my heart and not the least bit confused or frustrated (and don’t tell me it’s because of the Prozac! )

 

[Lefty0908]

Lefty weren’t you Catholic before you left the Church and decided to become Mormon?

How did that happen?

No. I’ve been a Latter-day Saint all my life (I’ve noticed that posters here sometimes refer to themselves as “Cradle Catholics” so I guess you could say that I’m a “Gamete Mormon” ).

My connection with Catholics is mainly through the family of my brother, who converted. They are as devout a family of Christians as I know. When their son was to be married, they initially asked if I would read a scripture in the wedding mass. I was deeply moved by this. But their Priest could not give his consent because, of course, I am not of your faith and I guess the reading of scriptures has to be done by a communicant Catholic. I had absolutely no problem with that and considered the matter closed. My only reason in accepting the invitation was to be supportive of my nephew and his soon-to-be wife (and after all, my brother’s family could attend only the wedding reception of my own son, who was married in the temple, so what kind of jerk would I be to take offense???). In an act of incredible kindness and graciousness, Father said that if my sister-in-law (Cradle Catholic herself) would compose The Prayer of the Faithful, he would allow me to read it (I still tear up thinking about that). The presence of the Holy Spirit in the wedding mass was so strong. And I also smile as I write this, thinking of the joy and fellowship of the parish members in the party and dance that followed that evening. Father, my brother, and I are of “a certain age” and were able to impress all the young pups at the dance when the DJ played “Shout” and the three of us faithfully recreated the Animal-House-Otis-Day-and-the-Knights dance moves. It was just a great day.

So I come to this site knowing that it’s absurd to make sweeping generalizations about any people of faith based on the actions or speech of a few (or even a very many) that are encountered in one’s own limited experience (not that that conviction will change the minds and approach to Mormons which persist on the part of some of you! ).

 

[Lefty0908]

Please prove your contention. It seems highly unlikely that EVERY Catholic had no knowledge. Or that you met a Catholic and spent the next while asking them everything they know…or that your knowledge was good enough to know they did not know. More importantly, why you felt the need to dodge the point by pointing the fingers at others.

Lefty, your conduct here has certainly inspired me to pray for you. You do not appear to follow the teachings of Christ, though you DO follow the teachings of Joseph and Brigham. You belittle people, mock people, and use sarcasm to mask your shortcomings.

I will make it a point to pray for you daily.

Have a Happy New Year

It’s called hyperbole, TK. Sheesh! Of course it’s a ridiculous contention, but not more so than PepBandMom’s. That’s the point. It’s just no fun to be snarky if you have to explain your snarkiness!

 

[TexanKnight]

It’s called hyperbole, TK. Sheesh! Of course it’s a ridiculous contention, but not more so than PepBandMom’s. That’s the point. It’s just no fun to be snarky if you have to explain your snarkiness!

Just because you have no logical or decent answer to an issue does not mean it is ridiculous.

You tend to either dodge and fail to respond to questions, or mock the post and/or poster. Yes…I can tell you are a cradle LDS

 

[Stephen168]

Not really. They are not paid. Catholic clergy, on the other hand are in it for the money, don’t ya know.

Yes, our clergy are in it for that minimum wage they draw (at my Diocese anyway).

It seems Mormons might be trying to change another definition; in the case ‘professional.’ Most people understand professional to mean “getting paid for the work.” But to at least one Mormon it seems to mean “they know what they are talking about.”

Even using the new Mormon definition it does seem the Catholic Church has a professional clergy.

 

[Miriam1947]

No. I’ve been a Latter-day Saint all my life (I’ve noticed that posters here sometimes refer to themselves as “Cradle Catholics” so I guess you could say that I’m a “Gamete Mormon” ).

My connection with Catholics is mainly through the family of my brother, who converted. They are as devout a family of Christians as I know. When their son was to be married, they initially asked if I would read a scripture in the wedding mass. I was deeply moved by this. But their Priest could not give his consent because, of course, I am not of your faith and I guess the reading of scriptures has to be done by a communicant Catholic. I had absolutely no problem with that and considered the matter closed. My only reason in accepting the invitation was to be supportive of my nephew and his soon-to-be wife (and after all, my brother’s family could attend only the wedding reception of my own son, who was married in the temple, so what kind of jerk would I be to take offense???). In an act of incredible kindness and graciousness, Father said that if my sister-in-law (Cradle Catholic herself) would compose The Prayer of the Faithful, he would allow me to read it (I still tear up thinking about that). The presence of the Holy Spirit in the wedding mass was so strong. And I also smile as I write this, thinking of the joy and fellowship of the parish members in the party and dance that followed that evening. Father, my brother, and I are of “a certain age” and were able to impress all the young pups at the dance when the DJ played “Shout” and the three of us faithfully recreated the Animal-House-Otis-Day-and-the-Knights dance moves. It was just a great day.

So I come to this site knowing that it’s absurd to make sweeping generalizations about any people of faith based on the actions or speech of a few (or even a very many) that are encountered in one’s own limited experience (not that that conviction will change the minds and approach to Mormons which persist on the part of some of you! ).

What a great story about the wedding.

I guess I confused you with someone else.

 

[SaintPatrick333]

I find scripture comforting on this topic

I see ‘good fruits’ from the LDS tree, in the lives of the LDS I know.

Joseph Smith was one of the wolves Scriptures speak of. Guarantee it.

 

[Telstar]

So, Telstar, I was kind of enjoying our discussion on the BOM witnesses because it actually had something to do with the theme of this thread (a rarity on this website! :sad_yes. Hopefully we can get back to the topic, but before that I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate the information you gave me on the criteria the RCC uses to distinguish real visions and revelations from those that are false or deceptive. Of course it’s quite foreign to me and as you indicated, I don’t find it acceptable to my understanding of revelation. Nonetheless, I respect the underlying spiritual principles that seem to be guiding the RCC leaders in making these assessments and certainly respect your openness with me in sharing them.

I guess this forum isn’t all that different than some others I’ve been on. Threads tend to go off on tangents and get hijacked from the original subject, all the time.

I knew that stuff about visions was going to be a little beyond what a LDS would find acceptable, but it’s just a small part of the kind of investigation that the RCC has developed over the centuries to assess who’s a true visionary, and who’s just a tad off bubble. There are so many fakers out there, that the Church has learned to err on the side of caution and reject anything that doesn’t quite seem to pass the sniff tests. It’s easier to change their position and approve something later on, when it’s more obvious that it’s actually true, than to have to pull the reins in on people that have already run full steam ahead in believing in a fruitcake.

As to our discussion about the witnesses of the plates that were translated into the Book of Mormon, I don’t find your arguments against their straightforward testimonies very compelling, and by the same token, you say the same about what I have presented. Imagine that! The “dupes and stooges” theory of these men just doesn’t wash with what I have come to know about their lives both in and out of my church as well as the consistency with which they gave their witness throughout the years. But I think we might be through with that particular subject unless we now start to go around in circles.

Go figure. We disagree on stuff?!

Yeah, I’m not a big fan of chasing my tail, so I think we can drop the ‘testimony’ discussion. I tend to be the more conservative and cautious type that isn’t easily convinced by such weak (IMHO) evidence of mystical activity. Sorry, that’s just how I see it.

So how about this: You seem to have some knowledge of the BOM. It certainly can’t be disputed that the thing exists. So if Joseph Smith’s story of how it was produced is bogus, what’s your theory of how the Book of Mormon came into being?

I have a very limited knowledge of the BoM. I’ve said many times, I really have an aversion to reading it because it just drives me bonkers. The writing style of the author is the worst part, not to mention some of the stuff that just makes no sense to me.

Hmmm… this is a tough one for me to answer. I know LDS hold it, and JS, in such high esteem that I don’t really know how to give my honest opinion without being blunt and seriously offending some people. You might not believe it, but I really don’t like hurting people’s feelings, and I know it would probably just really tick some other people off if I said what I really think about it. Can I just plead the fifth and avoid answering it altogether?

 

[Jerusha]

Telstar, your description of your reaction to attempting read the Book of Mormon contained some very gently chosen words. That is one reason why I choose to dwell on the good stuff, and then use that good stuff to disprove Mormonism.

I just like paradoxes.

 

[sallybutler]

When will the Mormon Scriptures be converted into Modern English?

 

[Jerusha]

I had already mentioned that. Here it is:
amazon.com/Easy-Read-Lynn-Matthews-Anderson/dp/0964495708
It is not approved by the lds church, because she tamed down the rougher parts for kids.

 

[Lefty0908]

What a great story about the wedding.

I guess I confused you with someone else.

Thanks, Miriam. In my own mind, if I extrapolate just this one experience, I can only conclude that there are lots and lots and lots of wonderful Catholic Christians.

 

[Lefty0908]

I had already mentioned that. Here it is:
amazon.com/Easy-Read-Lynn-Matthews-Anderson/dp/0964495708
It is not approved by the lds church, because she tamed down the rougher parts for kids.

I don’t get that. You imply that the Church routinely “approves” or “disapproves” books written by or about Mormons. That is not the case. We have no equivalent of an ecclesiastical imprimatur. There is no official “not approved” associated with the book to which you linked. I doubt anybody outside Utah County has even heard of it.

 

[batman1973]

When will the Mormon Scriptures be converted into Modern English?

Never. I used to be a Mormon for many years, then joined the Reorganized LDS Church(The group that didnt go west with Brigham Young). To the Mormons, thier scripture is “sacred” and is perfect in it’s Elizabethian(sp?) english. There is a “modern english” Book of Mormon, but it is not sanctioned by any Restored Gospel group. In 1966, the RLDS Church made a “Revised Authorized Version” of the Book of Mormon, which removed many of the "And it came to pass"es from the Book of Mormon, and did modernize some of the words. This version is hotly contested by members of the “breakaway” sects of the RLDS (Now named Community of Christ)

 

[Jerusha]

It was not published by a church publisher, even though that was her intent. And, as one of the reviewers said, cutting away the repetitive antiquated language reveals an insipid, sappy plot. Which is not what happens with the Bible in modern language.

 

[ParkerD]

When will the Mormon Scriptures be converted into Modern English?

Sally Butler,

I doubt that they will if your question is implying a comparison to “modern English” Bible translations.

But here is a passage, directly from the Book of Mormon and its “King James Bible English”, that I think most any reader who has a fairly good background in the English language, can understand readily:

1 Nephi 8:3 And behold, because of the thing which I have seen, I have reason to rejoice in the Lord because of Nephi and also of Sam; for I have reason to suppose that they, and also many of their seed, will be saved.

4 But behold, Laman and Lemuel, I fear exceedingly because of you; for behold, methought I saw in my dream, a dark and dreary wilderness.

5 And it came to pass that I saw a man, and he was dressed in a white robe; and he came and stood before me.

6 And it came to pass that he spake unto me, and bade me follow him.

7 And it came to pass that as I followed him I beheld myself that I was in a dark and dreary waste.

8 And after I had traveled for the space of many hours in darkness, I began to pray unto the Lord that he would have mercy on me, according to the multitude of his tender mercies.

9 And it came to pass after I had prayed unto the Lord I beheld a large and spacious field.

10 And it came to pass that I beheld a tree, whose fruit was desirable to make one happy.

11 And it came to pass that I did go forth and partake of the fruit thereof; and I beheld that it was most sweet, above all that I ever before tasted. Yea, and I beheld that the fruit thereof was white, to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.

12 And as I partook of the fruit thereof it filled my soul with exceedingly great joy; wherefore, I began to be desirous that my family should partake of it also; for I knew that it was desirable above all other fruit.

13 And as I cast my eyes round about, that perhaps I might discover my family also, I beheld a river of water; and it ran along, and it was near the tree of which I was partaking the fruit.

14 And I looked to behold from whence it came; and I saw the head thereof a little way off; and at the head thereof I beheld your mother Sariah, and Sam, and Nephi; and they stood as if they knew not whither they should go.

15 And it came to pass that I beckoned unto them; and I also did say unto them with a loud voice that they should come unto me, and partake of the fruit, which was desirable above all other fruit.

16 And it came to pass that they did come unto me and partake of the fruit also.

17 And it came to pass that I was desirous that Laman and Lemuel should come and partake of the fruit also; wherefore, I cast mine eyes towards the head of the river, that perhaps I might see them.

18 And it came to pass that I saw them, but they would not come unto me and partake of the fruit.

19 And I beheld a rod of iron, and it extended along the bank of the river, and led to the tree by which I stood.

20 And I also beheld a strait and narrow path, which came along by the rod of iron, even to the tree by which I stood; and it also led by the head of the fountain, unto a large and spacious field, as if it had been a world.

21 And I saw numberless concourses of people, many of whom were pressing forward, that they might obtain the path which led unto the tree by which I stood.

22 And it came to pass that they did come forth, and commence in the path which led to the tree.

23 And it came to pass that there arose a mist of darkness; yea, even an exceedingly great mist of darkness, insomuch that they who had commenced in the path did lose their way, that they wandered off and were lost.

24 And it came to pass that I beheld others pressing forward, and they came forth and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press forward through the mist of darkness, clinging to the rod of iron, even until they did come forth and partake of the fruit of the tree.

25 And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed.

26 And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; and it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.

27 And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceedingly fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.

28 And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.

29 And now I, Nephi, do not speak all the words of my father.

30 But, to be short in writing, behold, he saw other multitudes pressing forward; and they came and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press their way forward, continually holding fast to the rod of iron, until they came forth and fell down and partook of the fruit of the tree.

31 And he also saw other multitudes feeling their way towards that great and spacious building.

32 And it came to pass that many were drowned in the depths of the fountain; and many were lost from his view, wandering in strange roads.

33 And great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building. And after they did enter into that building they did point the finger of scorn at me and those that were partaking of the fruit also; but we heeded them not.

Peace to you, Sally, and to all readers. Have a wonderful Sabbath day.