Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by InCognitus

  1. When God said, "Let there be light", how do you think that happened? A construction crew from the Telestial Kingdom union got to work on it right away.
  2. Who do you think it was that decided to use a small G instead of a capital G for Moses and Satan in the KJV Bible, and other Bible translations? And why do you think they made the choice to use a small G? Look at these translations of Exodus 7:1: NASB: "Then the LORD said to Moses, “See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet." DBY: "And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." Why do you think the choice was made, one way or another? (It didn't come from the Hebrew ma
  3. What a great idea. What you say here reminds me of something Justin Martyr wrote (between AD 155-157), but not so much for what he wrote but what it says in the footnotes of one of the translations of his works. Here's the quote from Justin Martyr (The First Apology, Chapter 66😞 And here's what it says in the footnote to the above in Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume I, p.185: As the footnote suggests, this particular quote from Justin Martyr tends to be the center of a lot of debate, since it is one of the earliest Christian expressions on
  4. But you didn't answer my question. What do you think was intended by using a capital G in saying that men become "Gods" in the writings of the early Christians? Why use a capital G instead of a lower case G when talking about men becoming "Gods"? Do you believe that was due to a theological change, or something else? Also, why do you believe differently than the early Christians? It is not a theological change, but merely a preference on relative relationship, as has been explained to you many times before here, here, and most recently here: So a text could use the wor
  5. So in your view, do you believe "God" with a capital G should only be reserved for Heavenly Father, the one Supreme God who is the God of gods? And if so, do you believe that the early Christians or the translators of their writings were saying that men would become Heavenly Father when they said men could become "God" or be "Gods"? (As in these quotations: Origen, “He is the God of these beings who are truly Gods, and then He is the God, in a word, of the living and not of the dead.”, Irenaeus, “How, then, shall he be a God, who has not as yet been made a man?”, and Hippolytus, “If, ther
  6. I wasn't trying to attribute any bad or malicious intent in what you asked. But what you asked me simply had no relationship to what I said that I could tell, so it seemed like you were trying to turn things around for some other purpose (whatever that may be), different than what I was talking about. After asking your question you said "Don't bother. I already know the answer". What kind of response from me did you really expect after saying something like that? You asked: "Is there evidence, anywhere in the world, that KEP phrases he translated or Egyptian phrases he uttered in t
  7. Thomas Wayment also did the latest podcast from LDS Perspectives Podcasts on this topic (here). I haven't read it or listened to it yet (I'm trying to save it for my road trip next week, but I'm not sure if I can wait). But here is the transcript.
  8. My point about Joseph "knowing" how to translate was from a purely academic point of view, and your description of the process above isn't the normal academic method of doing a translation. Joseph didn't personally know how to recognize words in another language and translate them in the same way someone proficient in foreign languages would do it. If there was something to be revealed from a text, it was given to him by the gift and power of God. And it's obvious that he didn't even need to have whatever text it was to be translated in front of him when doing the translation, because Jose
  9. Based on what I said why would you even ask me this question? I'm not sure if you just misread what I posted, or if you are intentionally trying to turn things around for some other purpose.
  10. I don't think Joseph Smith thought he "knew" how to translate Egyptian anymore than he "knew" how to translate Reformed Egyptian in the Book of Mormon. The "translations" (as he called them) for the Book of Mormon and book of Abraham were given to him by revelation, and therefore the only knowledge required on Joseph Smith's part was that which allowed him to receive and confirm that revelation. But I do suspect that Joseph and others were trying to make sense of the Egyptian language given the materials available to them at the time, but that was a totally separate and completely secular ve
  11. I believe that the full scope of the doings of Heavenly Father extend far beyond the context of the Bible. But this verse does tell us that Jesus “overcame” and sits with God in his throne, and Jesus provided the way for others to do the same.
  12. He's just giving them their monies worth and the things that they want to hear.
  13. Do you believe in the same letter that Joseph is also saying that he can translate Chaldean, Greek, French, Turkish, German, Arabic, Spanish, Samaritan, Italian, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, and Latin?
  14. "Obviously"? So would you "obviously" also assume from that that Joseph could translate Chaldean, Greek, French, Turkish, German, Arabic, Spanish, Samaritan, Italian, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, and Latin?
  15. And yet with all of what you say above, people still say he managed to produce the Book of Mormon using early modern English. That's pretty impressive. Can you please point out where in the letter you linked in the opening post that Joseph said he could translate Egyptian? Edit: The title of this thread at the time of making this post is: "do We Believe Joseph Smith or Lds Apologists? Joseph Says He Could Translate Egyptian." I'm adding this to make it clear that the claim associated with the letter is in the headline.
  16. That sounds like a story I was thinking of when I saw this thread. Late one evening we noticed that our cat was missing. He doesn't go outside much, but he does do that occasionally. And he has never strayed beyond our property line. Our back yard is completely fenced and he doesn't like to climb walls, so I couldn't imagine him going anywhere away from our house. But we looked all over the house. We called him and searched everywhere including the closets and his usual sleeping places, but we couldn't find him. So my wife had me go looking up and down the street and in the al
  17. I appreciate the books and other sources recommended from scholars on this topic. I've been wanting to investigate this topic further myself. In some manuscripts of Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI, Chapter 1, Josephus said that Cyrus said that God had "foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea." Josephus goes on to say: I don't know if this portion of Josephus has been disputed, or if Josephus was embellishing or using popularized stories for his audience. Apparently, according to the footnotes in the Whiston tr
  18. I detected a tongue in cheek tone in his statement. Biblical scholars have to be "scholarly", which doesn't allow for belief in prophecy apparently.
  19. The irony of this attitude is that this lack of trust is based on the presumption of bias toward the faith claims of the church that an LDS member expert might naturally have while ignoring the possibility of bias against the church that a non LDS expert might have. Unfortunately there isn't an anti-Mormon church where we can check a person's membership record and standing within the organization, but we can attempt to measure bias against the church based on the way the person attempts to interact with the scholarship from those within the church. And one of the biggest problems that
  20. I ran across this quote from Joseph Smith recently, saying exactly that: Edit: I found the Joseph Smith Papers text of the above interesting in that it seems to confirm a view I have of the so called "rapture", the catching up described in places like the familiar 1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:10, but also in D&C 45:44-45, 88:97, and 109:74-75. But the interesting part is crossed out in the manuscript. This is the crossed out part in bold, from the p.967 link above: That's how I have always imagined the timing of that event, but I didn't realize that there was support for that
  21. And: This is the kind of nonsense bullying that occurs with these debates and all the more reason to not participate in them, in my opinion. Formal debates are always so unsatisfying to me, even when I don't have a solid opinion about one side or the other. The time constraints for responses and the moderator really controls the outcome, and it can leave the topic with a one sided view without resolution. I can think of several debates that I have watched or listened to in the past where I have thought that one side didn't get the opportunity to respond to several of the things
  22. Sometimes just exposing them to family history and helping them to construct their family tree helps the relatives connect with their ancestors and is a natural lead into missionary work. The church website has a lot of good resources on doing this, such as: The Power of Family History in Missionary Work.
  • Create New...