Smithsonian statement on Book of Mormon

[TOmNossor]

Oat Soda and Catholic-RCIA,
oat soda:

you think everyone is out to get you. it’s pathetic.

joesph smith was so crazy i feel sorry for him.

Actually, I do not think you are so much out to get me. I had previously appealed to you to change the way you interact because I feel it is not appropriate. I gave up on inviting you to change and thought I might invite other Catholics to invite you to change.

As we go forward, I will continue to mention your deportment for the purpose of those who read this thread. To call Joseph Smith names and claim that LDS are crazy, pathetic, insane, dishonest, … is to attempt to use the logical fallacy of ad hominem (whether you are conscious of this I do not know). The idea is that you may prejudice the audience with your words that have nothing to do with the substance of your ideas. You attack the man not his positions.

My response to you is a combination of two things. My response is intended to be a subtle ad hominem attack on your position. Without being ugly I hope that anyone influenced by ad hominem fallacies will see that you are not being kind. This will prejudice them against your positions (if they are influenced by ad hominem fallacies that is). The second purpose of my pointing to this is to be that there is a small amount of truth to be gleaned from the Biblical truth, “by their fruits ye shall know them” and your deportment. I agree with Catholic-RCIA wheat and tares exist in all of us. I believe Christ through the CoJCoLDS is more effective at purging us of our tares than He is through the Catholic Church.

Another thing I will continue to note about your interaction on this thread is that you ask for logic and reason, but when things such as your “Clement test” are logically addressed (post #178) you abandon what you said previously and move on to other things. You even claimed to have not read Clement’s words and that you do not need to. This is not conducive to logical examination of such things.

catholic-rcia:
“In time he will learn all about the tares that are within Him. I take the good with the bad. I have no problem with this. Nor should you, you are smarter than that. “ Lately we have had larger issues as you know.”

Yes, I agree with what you say here. I do not agree that in an Augustine-way I can see that the spirit of God shone into the lives of Catholics is superior to the spirit of God shone into the lives of LDS.

Extraordinary grace is evident in the lives of Catholic Saints, but I would say the same for many LDS of note. The commitment and focus on Christ among the average member is were I think average LDS reflect Christ better than average Catholics.

This is not of course the sole test of truth, but this in fact a large part of the observation Augustine made that lead him out of Manichæism, producing the quote to which you referred previously.

I both wish for Oat Soda to interact better and baring this, I intend to point out that his deportment reflects upon Catholicism. I have seen LDS interact on message boards in ways that I am ashamed of too.

And LDS have some “larger issues” too.

Charity, TOm

 

[oat_soda]

here is a south park episode about the stranger then life story of joseph smith: i4m.com/think/southpark/ not entirely accurate but pretty close.

Lucy takes the 116 pages from Harris and tells him that if Smith really is translating from gold plates, then he should have “no problem” re-translating the plates again and coming up with a matching manuscript.

Joseph Smith replied, “Oh my God! All is lost! Must I return to my wife with such a tale as this I dare not do it lest I should kill her at once.” (Lucy Smith History, 365-365)

Smith wrote “if you should bring forth the same words they will say that you have lied and that you have pretended to translate, but that you have contradicted yourself. And, behold, they will publish this, and Satan will harden the hearts of the people to stir them up to anger against you, that they will not believe my words.” (D&C 10:31-33)

So Smith was commanded to translate from a different person’s perspective. Thus, the Book of Mormon story could be told but it would not match the same version as the first 116-page manuscript, because it would be a translation from different plates. (See History of the Church 1:56).

Joseph Smith did not go back and start work on the Book of Mormon again for seven months

this is some hilarious stuff

 

[TOmNossor]

“My thoughts as to the above, what you have written about coming closer to Christ would be, the Jesus that my grandmother taught me about. The Jesus that is the brother of Lucifer, or the Jesus I have come to know as the creator of Lucifer, all powers whether in heaven or on earth. Johns Gospel, Colossians, Hebrews, and in many other areas of Scripture. As far back as Genesis, “let us make man in Our Image, onto Baptize in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Sprit”. Which Jesus are you speaking about? Tell me who Jesus is clearly.”

I believe the characteristics of Jesus Christ since He is God are not perfectly describable. I suggest that the components we agree upon are the components important towards making the Grace of God active in our lives. The components that we disagree upon are in fact of much less importance. If you like we can discussion the development of the Trinity. We can discuss the words of one ECF who acknowledged that Jesus Christ and Lucifer were in fact brothers. We can discuss how Creation ex Nihilo initiated Sabellianism, Ariansism, and ultimately the Augustinian Trinitarian concept. We can discover if you can define one-being-ness and three-person-ness in ways that my concept of the Trinity is not orthodox (the bulk of Nicea was associated with defining the Trinity such that Arius was a heretic). The above is intended to discourage this discussion. I think the “yea, but you look to a different Christ” is one of the most flawed anti-Mormon apologetics.

catholic-rcia:

I must admit positively that it was through my heart that I began to investigate the Catholic Church. It was the Scriptures that confirmed what my heart was telling me. I have not once been let down in this matter.

I have always felt that I wanted the truth and it was (is in a limited, glean truths from others not which religion, way) for which I searched/search. My heart was not as involved in my original choosing of the CoJCoLDS, but was certainly part of my choice of the CoJCoLDS over the Catholic Church when I revisited the question. I feel loved in my sins. I feel rescued from my sins by Christ. I feel enlightened and lifted up. My heart has become involved in ways it was not in the Catholic Church nor in my earlier years as a LDS.

catholic-rcia:

Here is what I was once taught:

1. Catholics worship Mary
2. Catholics pray to dead Saints
3. Catholics Worship a Wafer
4. Catholics invented the Mass
5. Catholics invented the Trinity
6. The Catholic Church Apostatized
7. Catholics worship Statues

It is easy to make other religions sound silly (for example, Jesus is Satan’s brother). It is quite common to present other religions in the most negative light possible. To know the truth and be lifted up by our study, I believe we must follow the following three rules from Lutheran Bishop (former Dean of Harvard Divinity School) Stendahl.

1.  Learn about the religion from those who hold it.

2.  Compare best to best.

3.  Leave room for holy envy (explained in post #107).

With the exception of 5 and 6 (perhaps 4) I would not say any of those things. If the Catholic Church is God’s church then 5&6 are false, otherwise they are more conclusions than arguments.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

tkdnick:
Wow, not often you hear someone other than a Catholic say we need greater respect for Mary!

Bruce R. McConkie, who at one time went too far in condemning the Catholic Church but was correct by the brethren, told an author to remove his chapter on Mary because Elder McConkie was uncomfortable with the negative statements made about the mother of Jesus Christ.

tkdnick:

I confess I have no idea what dulia, hyper-dulia, or latria are.

In Catholic thought (as I understand it).

Latria is worship only to be delivered to the Blessed Trinity.

Dulia is a lesser worship, but we should generally recognize it as more than just Honor, reserved for Saints.

Hyper-Dulia is a higher form of Dulia that does not become Latria, and is reserved from the Blessed Mary.

tkdnick:

THANK YOU!!! Gosh, if only everyone could see and understand that logic!!!

It is important that we learn about the beliefs of others from those who hold them. It is then only respectful to present them in a positive light so that we can compare “best to best.” I read about intercessory prayer and thought of how similar that was to when our ward asks us to pray for Typhoon victims, or when one person asks for prayers from another person.

tkdnick:

Gosh TOm I confess that you sound more Catholic than some Catholics I know.

Thank you. I have been accused of this by Catholics and Protestants. From you I take it as a positive, from Protestants it seldom is.

Some of the reason for this is that there is a great deal of similarities between our faiths. Another reason is that I have come to understand many things through my study of Catholicism. Where those things are in alignment with what I think a LDS should believe I embrace them.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

oat soda:

here is a south park episode about the stranger then life story of joseph smith: i4m.com/think/southpark/ not entirely accurate but pretty close. this is some hilarious stuff

Oat Soda,

I think it would be better if you appealed to Clement of Rome (who you claimed you had not read and did not need to read) to gain a better understanding of religion and God rather than South Park. Surely your time could be better spent with such things than with South Park’s theological perspectives.

There are many errors in what South Park presented.

Charity, TOm

 

[tkdnick]

TOmNossor:

In Catholic thought (as I understand it).

Latria is worship only to be delivered to the Blessed Trinity.

Dulia is a lesser worship, but we should generally recognize it as more than just Honor, reserved for Saints.

Hyper-Dulia is a higher form of Dulia that does not become Latria, and is reserved from the Blessed Mary.

Thank you.

Thank you. I have been accused of this by Catholics and Protestants. From you I take it as a positive…

Yes, from me it was a positive statement.

 

[flameburns623]

tkdnick:

So do you hold this eventhough the KJV was translated based on imperfect manuscripts and the tranlators acknowledged that they made mistakes?

The argument about manuscripts has been going on for awhile. There are two positions: the most well-known is that the older manuscripts are less likely to have suffered interpolations and mistakes and therefore are more reliable. This is the position taken by most mocern translators. It is NOT the position taken by Christian traditionalists of whatever stripe.

Our position is that it matters very much that one set of manuscripts has a KNOWN ‘pedigree’–that is, that we know that it was transmitted by people deeply committed to preserving the text faithfully and who had designed elaborate methods of proofreading which enabled them to do this. This manuscript tradition–the ‘Byzantine text’, formed the basis of the Latin Vulgate from which the Douay-Rheims was translated. It was this Byzantine manuscript tradition, aka the ‘Textus Receptus’ from which the King James was translated. The older manuscripts are NOT part of this tradition and in fact are in many cases clearly known to be manucripts which were preserve by ‘suspect’ groups or which were known to have serious errors in transmission such that these manuscripts were set aside. It is worthwhile to note–especially for Catholics, so fond of patristic tradition–that the citations of Scripture by early Church fathers favors the Byzantine text overwhelmingly.

But TDNick: you don’t care any more about this topic than the other person who raised it. Instead of bothering to dialogue about the issue I raised in response to boppysbud vis’a’vis reverent language and how it communicate or fails to communicate a sense of communion with a holy but personal God–you launch into a fresh dispute, over the issue of manuscripts. Since this isn’t the subject of this thread I will leave my response to this.

 

[oat_soda]

more wacky mormon scientific facts

God lives on a giant crystal ball. See D&C 130:6-8.

Kolob is “the great governing star of our universe” and “the residence of God.” See Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith’s “Church History and Modern Revelation” Volume 3, Page 60.

• Joseph Smith taught that the Ten Lost Tribes had gone to the North Pole, as it used to be warm, but God divided the Earth in two and they wound up between Texas and Florida. Then God scooped them up, leaving a big hole called the Gulf of Mexico. And these millions of Hebrews are today on this island floating around in the solar system, but we can’t see them because God has them flying at an angle where the telescopes can’t pick them up. But one day the island will crash back into the Gulf and the earth will reel to and fro like a drunken man. See http://www.code-co.com/rcf/mhistdoc/enoch.htm for tons of scriptural and Joseph Smith Teaching references.

this crazy stuff and much more here i4m.com/think/lists/mormon_science.htm

 

[tkdnick]

flameburns623:

The argument about manuscripts has been going on for awhile. There are two positions: the most well-known is that the older manuscripts are less likely to have suffered interpolations and mistakes and therefore are more reliable. This is the position taken by most mocern translators. It is NOT the position taken by Christian traditionalists of whatever stripe.

Our position is that it matters very much that one set of manuscripts has a KNOWN ‘pedigree’–that is, that we know that it was transmitted by people deeply committed to preserving the text faithfully and who had designed elaborate methods of proofreading which enabled them to do this. This manuscript tradition–the ‘Byzantine text’, formed the basis of the Latin Vulgate from which the Douay-Rheims was translated. It was this Byzantine manuscript tradition, aka the ‘Textus Receptus’ from which the King James was translated. The older manuscripts are NOT part of this tradition and in fact are in many cases clearly known to be manucripts which were preserve by ‘suspect’ groups or which were known to have serious errors in transmission such that these manuscripts were set aside. It is worthwhile to note–especially for Catholics, so fond of patristic tradition–that the citations of Scripture by early Church fathers favors the Byzantine text overwhelmingly.

But TDNick: you don’t care any more about this topic than the other person who raised it. Instead of bothering to dialogue about the issue I raised in response to boppysbud vis’a’vis reverent language and how it communicate or fails to communicate a sense of communion with a holy but personal God–you launch into a fresh dispute, over the issue of manuscripts. Since this isn’t the subject of this thread I will leave my response to this.

Now how can you honestly say that I don’t care about the topic??? I wouldn’t have asked if I didn’t want to know. AND, I didn’t know the history involved with the manuascripts with relation to the Latin Vulgate, Duoay Rheims, and KJV, so not only did I get an answer to my question, but I got some other information. Instead of making the assumption that I don’t care, why not try just answering the questions I ask?

 

[flameburns623]

tkdnick:

Now how can you honestly say that I don’t care about the topic??? I wouldn’t have asked if I didn’t want to know. AND, I didn’t know the history involved with the manuascripts with relation to the Latin Vulgate, Duoay Rheims, and KJV, so not only did I get an answer to my question, but I got some other information. Instead of making the assumption that I don’t care, why not try just answering the questions I ask?

Well, it didn’t help that you took the issue off on a tangent that I hadn’t addressed but I apologize, nonetheless. It’s amazing to me the number of seemingling intelligent posters I have been dealing with on controversial issues just lately who don’t bother to to read my own responses or follow-up on any links I offer, let alone do a bit of web-searching of their own to see if the ‘devastating rebuttal’ they proffer is actually a standard canard that has been refuted repeatedly. (Which may have raised the argumentation to a higher level of discourse–but often, there is no indication that many people on these forums are able or willing to engage afresh at that higher plane). And they ordinarily put forward such canards as if they were received carved in stone by the finger of God, heedless of any response by someone of a differing view.

A lot of these issues are not nearly so neatly resolved as some folks seem to think. I realize that Catholic Answers Radio Programs cannot possibly spend much time trying to deal with theology at much more than a high-school level–they’d lose too many listeners. (Though RC Sproul and Ravi Zecharias certainly far outstrip anything that CA radio apologists have shown themselves willing to experiment with). These forums, however, bring people together who ostensibly WANT to think rather more deeply on apologetics issues than the casual radio listener. I stress that this is an ‘apparent’ motivation–in actual practice it seems seldom to be true.

Again my sincerest apologies to you, Nick.

 

[tkdnick]

flameburns623:

It’s amazing to me the number of seemingling intelligent posters I have been dealing with on controversial issues just lately who don’t bother to to read my own responses or follow-up on any links I offer, let alone do a bit of web-searching of their own to see if the ‘devastating rebuttal’ they proffer is actually a standard canard that has been refuted repeatedly. (Which may have raised the argumentation to a higher level of discourse–but often, there is no indication that many people on these forums are able or willing to engage afresh at that higher plane). And they ordinarily put forward such canards as if they were received carved in stone by the finger of God, heedless of any response by someone of a differing view.

Again my sincerest apologies to you, Nick.

Apology accepted, forgiven, etc.

Well I confess that I do not follow links on a regular basis as I don’t have large amounts of time to read long things, I do ALWAYS read a person’s response however. And I must confess that I am similar to the people you suggest. I have no background re: the KJV translation. I only stated what I heard, and that was that the KJV transcripts were “tainted”. I had done no research, no in-depth look into the subject. So your response actually gave me some info re: the KJV translation as well as some other translations. I thank you for that! I am now tasked with doing more research on my own.

 

[MaggieOH]

tkdnick:

Apology accepted, forgiven, etc.

Well I confess that I do not follow links on a regular basis as I don’t have large amounts of time to read long things, I do ALWAYS read a person’s response however. And I must confess that I am similar to the people you suggest. I have no background re: the KJV translation. I only stated what I heard, and that was that the KJV transcripts were “tainted”. I had done no research, no in-depth look into the subject. So your response actually gave me some info re: the KJV translation as well as some other translations. I thank you for that! I am now tasked with doing more research on my own.

This stuff is getting off the topic and has nothing to do with the original intention of the thread. Surely if you want to discuss this subject you can do it by starting another thread. In that way we can all contribute rather than taking over the discussion that relates to the BOM.

Maggie

 

[catholic-rcia]

This is a response to one who follows the Koran. I have to post this. I am getting a bit tired, if it offends, I can’t change that.
It was the Apostasy teachings that brought me home to the Catholic Church. I have heard so much gossip in my life. It always hurt when people would do this to each other. I have a hard time with I am better, or we are better, etc… I do not find this at the heart of the Catholic Church at all, Christianity in general. when you get down to Jesus, and then the Saints. When I get down to my heart I know these things quite well. Mostly it is from pride. Peace in this life is a special gift. It gives even in the hardest of times. Looking down on another is petty, it is human, and it is dangerous. There is so much prejudice in this world. I myself do not want to be a part of it.
I have no one at all to impress. If I can bring Christ forward at all, let Him impress you. My connection to Him is purely gifted to me, to all who know Him. So in my quiet ways I have found the foot of the Cross. Or I should say it has found me. I can look past all of the evils of people and set my gaze on Satan. I do not have to be something I really am not anymore, who can I impress? Who can I fool? God?
No He loves me in spite of myself, but who He really loves is His Son because together they are the very essence of it. Love is what His Son can give me, just a mere creature. Satan wants to be loved by God, but first he must put aside Jesus. This will never happen. It’s impossible! It’s not of love. It’s of nothing

assadi_news@hotmail.com writes:

“Jesus is just a great man, as he did not say: I am greater than all”

Of course not, we are speaking about Jesus. As a Man Jesus did not look for greatness at all, he did not look for any power at all other than what came down through Him from the Father. He was in the perfect grace of the Father; Moses was not in this perfect grace. Moses was a creature like you and I created by God through Jesus (Colossians 1). You try and make points, but you leave out all of the proper Scriptures for balance. So many do this, why? Put them all side by side in their proper context. Otherwise you are deceiving. Here is something for you to look at. It is from the prophet of the Mormon Church. It shows a jealousy of Jesus. This is their leader speaking about the Catholic Church and Jesus. They speak of a complete falling away of the Catholic Church, this is how they bring in new converts. They to take many things out of context in order to make points. It is nothing new. They hand pick to make points. Here is our fallen nature clearly. It comes down to intent and motive. Only in Christ can we overcome it. My Church helps me see my sin, and then offers me the greatest tools to heal from them. These wonderful things come by the way of the Cross.

“Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet…When they can get rid of me, the devil will also go.” (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 408, 409 - Joseph Smith: founder, prophet, seer, and revelator of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

As Catholics we understand this fallen nature, this jealousy of Jesus. We all have this evil within us. So we rely on Christ, so that He can help us rise above it. Not in this life, what we have in this life is forgiveness and reconciliation. (Healing) This helps us get through our sinful nature. It helps us reconcile with each other while on the path to the Cross, to die with and in Christ as to be risen in Him. He is of God and he is God (John 1 This is my Belief.

Hope you can find the peace that I have found in Christ. He is the only thing good in me. Love Rich

 

[TOmNossor]

It is not my intention for you to get tired. I do wish to point out that the CoJCoLDS is in fact a reasonable conclusion to the question, “Which church is God’s Church?”

I agree with you we are not to rejoice in our superiority, but if you do not think you are in the most correct church on the face of the earth it is time from you to change churches. I have often thought that when I see the critics of the church in heaven, I will no longer be a person who will take pleasure in being correct. I do not fear as much for the soles of those outside of the CoJCoLDS. I do not even fear for honest sincere critics who walk by the light they have. I can engage in these discussion without trying to convert but only trying to reach out. Here is something Joseph Smith said you will not see quoted by a critic:

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way. Do you believe in Jesus Christ and the Gospel of salvation which he revealed? So do I. Christians should cease wrangling and contending with each other, and cultivate the principles of union and friendship in their midst; and they will do it before the millennium can be ushered in and Christ takes possession of His kingdom.

cont…

 

[tkdnick]

catholic-rcia:

“Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet…When they can get rid of me, the devil will also go.” (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 408, 409 - Joseph Smith: founder, prophet, seer, and revelator of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)

I was totally flabberghasted and furious when I first read this about a year ago! The first thing that came to my mind was that this is the epitomy of vain pride.

 

[TOmNossor]

Concerning Joseph Smith’s statement. Two things of note and an admission.
First, Joseph specifically spoke of 2 Cor 11 and Paul’s word were Paul boasted as well. Joseph Smith claimed that he was speaking similarly to Paul.

Second, the sentence before what you quoted reads, “God is in the still small voice. In all these affidavits, indictments, it is all of the devil–all corruption.” This is important for two reasons. One is that Joseph Smith recognizes that it is God’s strength that strengthens him. Two, Joseph Smith is responding to the attacks and persecutions of his critics. In fact, directly after your quote he mentions that he has had men writing of his acts for the past three years so that nobody will be able to lie about him. Joseph Smith went through a lot. Here is a revelation received during one of his greater trials.

D&C 121

1 O God, where art thou? And where is the pavilion that covereth thy hiding place?
2 How long shall thy hand be stayed, and thine eye, yea thy pure eye, behold from the eternal heavens the wrongs of thy people and of thy servants, and thine ear be penetrated with their cries?
3 Yea, O Lord, how long shall they suffer these wrongs and unlawful oppressions, before thine heart shall be softened toward them, and thy bowels be moved with compassion toward them?
4 O Lord God Almighty, maker of heaven, earth, and seas, and of all things that in them are, and who controllest and subjectest the devil, and the dark and benighted dominion of Sheol stretch forth thy hand; let thine eye pierce; let thy pavilion be taken up; let thy hiding place no longer be covered; let thine ear be inclined; let thine heart be softened, and thy bowels moved with compassion toward us.
5 Let thine anger be kindled against our enemies; and, in the fury of thine heart, with thy sword avenge us of our wrongs.
6 Remember thy suffering saints, O our God; and thy servants will rejoice in thy name forever

to which God responded:

7 My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
8 And then, if thou endure it well, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all thy foes.
9 Thy friends do stand by thee, and they shall hail thee again with warm hearts and friendly hands.
10 Thou art not yet as Job; thy friends do not contend against thee, neither charge thee with transgression, as they did Job.
11 And they who do charge thee with transgression, their hope shall be blasted, and their prospects shall melt away as the hoar frost melteth before the burning rays of the rising sun;
12 And also that God hath set his hand and seal to change the times and seasons, and to blind their minds, that they may not understand his marvelous workings; that he may prove them also and take them in their own craftiness;
13 Also because their hearts are corrupted, and the things which they are willing to bring upon others, and love to have others suffer, may come upon themselves to the very uttermost;

TOm:

The admission. If those words are reasonably close to the words spoken by Joseph, I think he went too far. He went farther than Paul, Ammon, and others. Too far.

Charity, TOm

 

[tkdnick]

TOmNossor:

…but if you do not think you are in the most correct church on the face of the earth it is time from you to change churches.

There are SO MANY who not only don’t believe their church is the most correct, but don’t think it matters one way or the other. I have met Protestants, especially “non-demoninational”, who say that everyone needs to worship their own way and no one is more right. That is doesn’t matter what church you belong to because they are all imperfect and man-made and there can’t be one that is more correct than the others.

 

[Mfaustina1]

Alas, so many posts, so little time to read them all! Hence, few if any will read my reply!

How can anyone take seriously a book that is so poorly written as “scripture”? I mean no disrespect! But I cannot understand how many times I have read “and it came to pass” so many times over and over again. The Bible is not this repetative, and if I were to write like this in High School, I would definately have earned a low mark. I don’t believe that anything “Holy Spirit” guided, would sound like this. It is the work of nothing more than a man. My sincere apologies for any offense. -Mfaustina1 :nope:

 

[TOmNossor]

tkdnick:

There are SO MANY who not only don’t believe their church is the most correct, but don’t think it matters one way or the other. I have met Protestants, especially “non-demoninational”, who say that everyone needs to worship their own way and no one is more right. That is doesn’t matter what church you belong to because they are all imperfect and man-made and there can’t be one that is more correct than the others.

I would suggest in a certain way they are embracing their view that it does not matter as superior to our view that it does. If they follow through to the logical conclusion of their thinking, they would recognize that if it does matter than they are in error. Unless they think these things are silly little games, they will not stand in error on purpose. So they have married themselves to the concept that it does not matter, considering this superior to our position that it does matter.

I think this is generally an excuse for intellectual or spiritual laziness. It is especially difficult to defend when these same people are willing to tell you, me, or Moslems that we are hell bound.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Mfaustina1:

Alas, so many posts, so little time to read them all! Hence, few if any will read my reply!

How can anyone take seriously a book that is so poorly written as “scripture”? I mean no disrespect! But I cannot understand how many times I have read “and it came to pass” so many times over and over again. The Bible is not this repetative, and if I were to write like this in High School, I would definately have earned a low mark. I don’t believe that anything “Holy Spirit” guided, would sound like this. It is the work of nothing more than a man. My sincere apologies for any offense. -Mfaustina1

I read your post.

I am not sure you said things in an offensive way. And fortunately for me you give me the opportunity to demonstrate a reason I believe the BOM to be divinely inspired.

Above I mentioned that one of the reasons the case for the BOM is so strong is that frequently the reasoning of critics is not only addressed by greater understanding provided by further discovery, but in fact the very problems highlighted by the critics become evidences for the validity of the BOM. This is so powerful because the critics are demonstrating what it is like to think as a modern person. Were Joseph Smith the author he would have thought as a modern person, and he would have avoided such errors. But Joseph Smith is not the author.

“And it came to pass” is quite strongly a Hebraism, and it also appears in the small amount of Mayan writings that do exist. This is very interesting considering that it is foreign to our modern sensibilities. In fact, Brant Gardner argues that it was a paragraph marker for text with no punctuation and this is common in the Mayan culture. First, a simple few paragraphs. Then I will link to Brant Gardner’s discussion for a more complex treatment.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/5499/bom/came2pass.html

“And it came to Pass” - occurs in the English translation of the BofM 1,381 times. It is found in all books except Moroni. Sometimes the phrase is recorded “Now it came to Pass” or “For Behold it came to pass” or “But Behold, it came to pass”. or “and it shall come to pass.”

The phrase is not unique to the BofM, the Bible utilizes the phrase or one of its derivatives, 526 times in the Old Testament and 87 times in the New Testament. This supports the fact that this phrase “and it came to pass” is Hebrew in origin and correlates with Nephi’s statement, “Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.”

Apparently, the Maya people, who lived in Southeast Mexico and Guatemala, may have adopted the phrase “and it came to pass.” Recent discoveries in the translations of the glyphs of the 7th Century AD Maya ruins of Palenque manifest the phrase “and then it came to pass” and “it had come to pass.” Recently, another glyph has been interpreted as “and it shall come to pass.”

In 1985, a Mayanist scholar, David Stuart, observed that the (Anterior Date Indicator) ADI and (Posterior Date Indicator) PDI named by Eric Thompson functioned as a grammatical and literary feature in both colonial and modern Maya languages. He speculated correctly when he interpreted the sound of the glyph as “Ut” in the Chol language and “Utchi” in the Maya language, meaning “to happen, or to come to pass.” (Schele 1987:26)

Two years earlier, John Justeson and Will Norman found a consistency in an event indicator that appear as the word “IWAL,” which means the action is ongoing at the time, such as “and” or “and then.” Together, UT-IWAL in the PDI in Maya glyphs read “and then it came to pass” or “and now it came to pass.”

So, one of the things which so many have criticized in the Book of Mormon, ‘comes to pass’ as one of the evidences of its truthfulness.

Another link:

http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ancients/040707pass.html

Charity, TOm