Neighbor Posted February 9, 2007 Author Posted February 9, 2007 No . . . why?Part of his book deals with different reasons we have to trust the words of God preserved in the OT. One evidence is the 'bible code' in the first five books of the bible doing things like equadistant spacing of the name of the messiah from start to finish. Had minor textual changes taken place the string would had been broken. Just a thought.
structurecop Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Part of his book deals with different reasons we have to trust the words of God preserved in the OT. One evidence is the 'bible code' in the first five books of the bible doing things like equadistant spacing of the name of the messiah from start to finish. Had minor textual changes taken place the string would had been broken. Just a thought.And what is the name of the Messiah? How "equidistant" are they?
Daniel Peterson Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Neighbor: Perhaps. Perhaps, unless the one killed by the mob was guilty of a variety of gross crimes against his neighbors, brethren, the State and God Himself. That's a pretty big charge, but if true it might not be a doctrine of demons to hold one accountable to the very judgement and sentence decreed of God in the Scriptures? Albeit that such a judgment would also bring the one taking liberty to do so outside of the system of justice instituted by God through the State and Nation would be accountable for his actions to the State and Nation. Either way both sides are accountable to God.Are you saying Joseph NEVER took such liberty himself?:-) Thanks for your thoughts!:-) Maybe as I learn more about JS I'll see him more as you do? I try to be fair.In the meantime, you're coming across as an apologist for mob murder. Not attractive. Not recognizably Christian.
Neighbor Posted February 9, 2007 Author Posted February 9, 2007 Dr. Peterson, that's why it's better to discuss other matters, like the teachings of Jesus, because then we can grow towards good rather than apart over things you nor I had anything to do with. We have different opinions of Joseph Smith Jr. but I'm sure they are more alike in what we believe of Jesus Christ. Shouldn't that be the better course?:-)
Neighbor Posted February 9, 2007 Author Posted February 9, 2007 And what is the name of the Messiah? How "equidistant" are they?Just looking around for my copy, but it's on loan to a friend. From memory, take the first letter of one of the names of the Messiah, like Yashua Hamashia (may not be correct:-), in the original Hebrew text go to the first letter, skip 48 letters and you would find the second letter of the name, go 48 spaces to the third letter and so forth... not just once, but through the entire book, start to finish. Impossible? by chance, yes. For God, no. For God to ensure it's still there? He says He will perform His word and upholds His word higher than His name. Many discount the matter, but I fear it is out of their desire to think what they want to instead of facing the fact that God, through the Spirit to Moses penned exactly word for word and spelling as well. Add to that the matter isn't discovered until we have computers to search it out? And that these computers are at a time when men find so little faith in the Scriptures as the words of God to man? No accident. God knew what was to come from the beginning.Books have been written on the subject. THE SIGNATURE OF GOD is one of the most reader friendly to date.Yet when will people also realize the prophetic word made sure about the restoration of Israel in these latter days to the exact date prophecied?? Guess many would rather hear about Anna Nicole dieing?:-( than explore the wonders of their creator and His love and care for us and His goodness decreed in His everlasting word.
structurecop Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Yet when will people also realize the prophetic word made sure about the restoration of Israel in these latter days to the exact date prophecied?? Guess many would rather hear about Anna Nicole dieing?:-( than explore the wonders of their creator and His love and care for us and His goodness decreed in His everlasting word.Very interesting. If you can find that book I'd be interested in what it says exactly. I am very disappointed at Anna Nicole's passing. I thought we had at least another 10 years of weight gain/weight loss and reality TV shows.
Still_Small_Voice Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 In my studies of the Bible, I found that it isn't so much what is written, but what is missing.We only have some of the writings of a few of the apostles in the Bible. There are many books missing that have been lost. Important truths have been lost in the Bible because of the missing writings.
Freedom in Truth Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 FIT:Rom. 11: 7, 25 7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest awere blinded ... 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come â??Blindness in partâ? - not full blindness. God did not leave the Jews in the dark - they have and had access to Godâ??s revelation. They had/have free will to choose whether or not to walk with God.Romans 11:1a - â??I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means!â? Romans 11:2a - â??God did not reject his peopleâ?Romans 11:11a - â??Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all!â? Romans 11:26a - â??And so all Israel will be savedâ?Romans 28b-29 - â?? . . . but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.â? Why did he leave the Jews in the dark?Guess what... The fullness of the Gentiles has come in and judgement has been set and new light has been given and people are rejecting it just like they did at the time of Christ. The fullness of the Gentiles has not come in yet. Neither has the fullness of Israel. Godâ??s light is His light - it doesnâ??t change. There will always be some who reject. Gentiles have been grafted into Israel - we have not replaced Israel.God does love us... but he will not stop us from corruping that which he gives us. That would take away free will.But it would also take away free will if we donâ??t know Godâ??s Truth - then we have nothing to accept or reject. Godâ??s love for us is so full and abundant that it is incomprehensible to us. Would God, who went to great lengths to have relationship with you and to walk with you, not even give you an opportunity to have relationship with Him?Romans 8:39 - â?? neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.â?
Zakuska Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Revelation 11 tells us that the gentiles will trod the holy city for 1260 Years.Its 2000 years hence. http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/rev_trumpets6b.htmlGod sent his Angel from heaven with the Gospel to preach to bring Judgement on the Gentile nations and Israel.Rev 14 6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to dpreach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every enation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made eheaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. Now there is no blindess because the second witness has been given.
Paul Ray Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Dr. Peterson, that's why it's better to discuss other matters, like the teachings of Jesus, because then we can grow towards good rather than apart over things you nor I had anything to do with. We have different opinions of Joseph Smith Jr. but I'm sure they are more alike in what we believe of Jesus Christ. Shouldn't that be the better course?:-)So are you saying you'd rather avoid admitting the fact that...JOSEPH SMITH WAS MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD...and move on to other issues?Why not just admit it and then go on to other issues? It's easy enough to prove.Joseph wasn't sentenced to die by any court of the law. A mob just broke into his jail and murdered him.And that is all I have to say about that.
Paul Ray Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Moses penned exactly word for word and spelling as well...THE SIGNATURE OF GOD is one of the most reader friendly to date.Are you saying you can't see any difference between the writing style of Moses and the writing style of Isaiah, or Daniel, or any of the other prophets? That, to you, it all looks exactly the same? That you can't see the different styles of writing?
consiglieri Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Part of his book deals with different reasons we have to trust the words of God preserved in the OT. One evidence is the 'bible code' in the first five books of the bible doing things like equadistant spacing of the name of the messiah from start to finish. Had minor textual changes taken place the string would had been broken. Just a thought.The Bible Code has already been thoroughly debunked. Why are we talking about it as if it had any validity?This to me sounds like a doctrine of demons.Just a thought.--Consiglieri
Freedom in Truth Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 What did you use as search criteria? I googled "variant + hebrews 1:3" and found this rather easily:"Scribes altered the phrase 'purification for sins' to 'purification for our sins' to avoid the parallel between Christ and the Levitical priests who provided purification for their own sins as well as those of the people."I was googling combinations like â??fool and knave . . â?? + Hebrews 1:3, codex vaticanus + Hebrews 1:3, etc. I was looking for the whole verse and not just the phrase. But thanks for finding your link.That was a fun list! Some of the variants were kind of strange. My NIV has all the versions the article considers correct. Luke 3:31 should be 3:21 though. (I didnâ??t check John 10:33.) You know, Iâ??m not really sure what the point is in producing such lists. We know there are variants, and we know people are not perfect. But since we know these variants are changes/additions it follows that we have better texts. Of the thousands of manuscripts, how many had these variants listed? It must have been a very small number for us to know that they do not reflect the original text. It seems that the majority of copyists were not altering text for a doctrine.Were these alterations in the manuscripts when the Trinity doctrine was written (creeds)? Was the doctrine dependent on the alterations? I donâ??t think so. Though the alterations were not accurate text, they didnâ??t change revelation.(By the way, I have no problem with the original wording of Hebrews 1:3.)
Zakuska Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Except for the fact that according to the Standard understanding of Innerracny there shouldn't have been any Alterations what so ever.
Zakuska Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Heres a quote from another thread given by the Pharoah with the failed botax issues. (Her Amun)â??Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to re-write the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be re-written, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation. According as people are willing to receive the things of God, so the heavens send forth their blessings. If the people are stiff-necked, the Lord can tell them but little.â? (Journal of Discourses 9:311) I thought it might help in furthering discussion.
Freedom in Truth Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 What doctrines did he reveal in 1/2 Kings and 1/2 Chronicles? The multiple Gospels? Why the duplicity?Jews didnâ??t write doctrine - Greeks did. 1-2 Kings and 1-2 Chronicles are history books from different points of view. The multiple gospels provide different points of view as well. Though we have different authors from different times, the message (revelation) is consistent.What revelation/message does the BoM contain that the Bible does not? Iâ??m not looking for history, I am looking for revelation. I am looking for why the BoM is important for your relationship with God.
structurecop Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 What revelation/message does the BoM contain that the Bible does not? Iâ??m not looking for history, I am looking for revelation. I am looking for why the BoM is important for your relationship with God.The revelation that scripture can be incorporated into our corpus whenever God deems it appropriate.
Freedom in Truth Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 1. Are you saying that everything must be equal? Are you saying that if the people who were born in the Abrahamic linage were more protected than those who weren't? Is this speaking of the same God who protected the BoM, but not the Bible? Godâ??s integrity, character, justice, mercy, and love are unchanging - correct? God reaches out to everyone, correct? We were speaking of God protecting His revelation - of God giving those who lived during the 1700 years opportunity to know Him. Iâ??m not sure what you are saying in your second sentence - please expound.You want to just put forth empty comparisons or really discuss something.I earnestly desire to discuss with you. Please remember, though, that we are discussing Mormon beliefs - you and your value as a person are separated from this.2. Read the BoM and find out for yourself.â??Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off foreverâ??And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL God, manifesting himself unto all nationsâ? (BoM Title Page)Jews are the House of Israel, right? Is there anything Jewish about the BoM? The Bible contains the Lordâ??s covenants, the Bible says â??they are not cast off foreverâ? (sort of), the Bible proclaims Jesus as Christ, the Eternal God . . . the ETERNAL God? You believe Jesus is the Eternal God? Does the BoM have any necessary revelation that the Bible doesnâ??t contain?â??It is a record of Godâ??s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fulness of the everlasting gospel.â? (BoM Introduction)It is stated here that the Bible contains the fulness of the everlasting gospel (in spite of alterations and â??plain and precious truth lostâ??, I guess). Then is the BoM necessary in addition to the Bible for your relationship with God?
Zakuska Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 It sure helps my relationship with God deepen by putting forth the Gospel in a much straight forward fashion than the Bible writers do. Its answer a lot of unanswered Bible questions.
Freedom in Truth Posted February 9, 2007 Posted February 9, 2007 Justin claims the Jews were editing/deleting out all kinds of Scripture passage to deChristify the OT.I think I might have just found another one... that I did not know about before.https://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/001/0010581.htmI donâ??t see that any of this contradicts known revelation, so I donâ??t really understand your concern. We know as well that not every writing survived - for example, the book of the annals of the kings of Judah (2 Kings 8:23) and the book of the annals of the kings of Israel (2 Kings 10:34).I just keep thinking your point is to show me that the Bible contains errors in revelation in order to show me that Mormonism has correct revelation - but you donâ??t. In fact, I thought Mormons didnâ??t believe God â??will send others to the condemnation of the unquenchable fireâ?. Are you arguing that this is correct and original?This might be from the same discourse...http://www.bombaxo.com/trypho.htmlYes the foot notes says there is no proof of it in any ancient text. But Irenaus quotes the same thing but says it was In Isaiah not Jermeiah.There's also one of these errors in the NT that the writer misquotes/misatributes a verse to Isaiah as well? I'll have to look that up in a minute.Jews, in their oral tradition, did sometimes misquote who said what in the OT. They would also quote scripture and pull a verse from one place and a verse from another and put them together. This was acceptable in their thinking and culture. We, however, tend to be Greek-thinkers, and we donâ??t like this approach - we consider it inaccurate. But Jews werenâ??t Greek-thinkers. And, their approach doesnâ??t change Godâ??s message.Yes thats one way to explain it away. However...Since Jeremiah was in prison at the time... how do we know that what we have is really what was written by Jeremiah? It was all burned after all. Perhaps what we have in Jeremiah are the words of the scribes of his Pursecutors? Unless I am missing something, Jeremiah goes into prison in chapter 37. However, Paul wrote in prison - so did John. Why would his persecutors rewrite a scroll? Since they didnâ??t like Jeremiahâ??s message then if we have their words they should read differently than Jeremiahâ??s - they should be things people like to hear. Do you see a section of Jeremiah where there is a different revelation?How do you know what you have was really written by JS? What if the ideas were from Martin Harris, Sidney Rigdon, or Oliver Cowdery? So what? Joseph Smith also was not working off Greek/Hebrew manuscripts but using a Bible that had alternate readings in Greek and Hebrew in the footnotes and going off pure revelation from God.Do you not take JS's translation seriously?â??The Lord inspired the Prophet Joseph Smith to restore truths to the Bible text that had become lost or changed since the original words were written. These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding. . . . Josephâ??s translation was more revelation than literal translation from one language into another.â? (from JST intoduction - lds.org)â??Pure revelation from Godâ?? Did God incompletely reveal to JS? Did God think some of these changes were O-K so He didnâ??t correct them? Did JS hear God wrong? Either Godâ??s revelation was faulty or incomplete, or JSâ??s ability to hear God was not infallible. If JS was fallible then there would be mistakes in all his writings. If you have to pray about whether or not what JS wrote is Truth, and you are fallible, then how can you ever know you know Truth?The point is... Monotheist redactors made the change to make the Jewish Bible appear more monothistic than it realy is.I donâ??t see how changing â??Children of God" to "Children of Israelâ? makes it more monotheistic.The reason it was changed was so the heretics could not use it (As a poster on this board said his Christian father in-law did) to say that since he is in Christ his sins don't count against him anymore. IOW, He can sin all he wants and God wuill just wink his eye at him.I donâ??t consider someone who believes that â??their sins donâ??t count against him anymoreâ? to be a heretic. However, I also donâ??t believe we can â??sin all we want and God will winkâ?.Romans 6:1-2a - "What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means!"Jesus died for all of our sins. We donâ??t sin all we want because sin hurts us and hurts our relationship with God. (I understand this is not the Mormon view.) Freedom in Truth - The Johannine Comma - 1 John 5:7-8 - My Bible also footnotes this. It was added in 1522. This means that the doctrine of the Trinity was established before these verses were added. The Johannine Comma is also in Joseph Smithâ??s translation of the Bible. He changed 1 John 5:18 but the rest of the chapter is the same as the KJV Bible. It is interesting to me that JS didnâ??t delete these verses.â??These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding.â? Keeping a verse that clearly supports the Trinity does not sound like clarifying doctrine and improving understanding. Your reasoning doesnâ??t work at all for me. This verse could have easily been caught WITHOUT revelation.Yet people still to this very day see gnosticism in the Gospel of John.People are free to interpret the Bible as they wish. Since the early church was against Gnosticism they apparently didnâ??t as a group see Gnosticism in John.I havent even touched all of the spelling errors that are in the "original copied manuscripts" that we do have.Why would that bother you? I am either misunderstanding your point or you are not being consistent. There were many errors such as this in the BoM (especially grammar and punctuation) - they donâ??t bother you but spelling errors in the Biblical manuscripts do?A translation which is performed by God won't have any problems. If He translates it 'river', then that's what it is.--FortigurnDo you believe this?
Neighbor Posted February 10, 2007 Author Posted February 10, 2007 The Bible Code has already been thoroughly debunked. Why are we talking about it as if it had any validity?This to me sounds like a doctrine of demons.Just a thought.--ConsiglieriIt was created by a mathmatician and published in a peer review journal and there was no proof it was bunk. The code exists. That is indisputable. What is disputable are coded texts of current and past historical events - names and dates and events - that have been found, as well as some that have not occurred yet. What is disputable is the numerous theories that if we find it ahead of time that we can change history. So is it there because God declared it so? Or is it there so we can change history and 'save' mankind?It's math Consiglieri, and to my knowledge such simple math is not 'debunked'
Neighbor Posted February 10, 2007 Author Posted February 10, 2007 Revelation 11 tells us that the gentiles will trod the holy city for 1260 Years.Its 2000 years hence. http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/rev_trumpets6b.htmlGod sent his Angel from heaven with the Gospel to preach to bring Judgement on the Gentile nations and Israel.Rev 14 6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to dpreach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every enation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made eheaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. Now there is no blindess because the second witness has been given.OK, lets have some light:-) A prophetic year is 360 days. We know when Israel was taken captive. We know that the Israel of Jesus day was not composed of the fulness of Israel, but they were scattered among the nations. They didn't repent and didn't return.Moses said if Israel didn't repent that God would multiply the punishment seven times. Do the math. How many days did the pophet lay on his sides? Multiply that by seven, divide by the 360 day prophetic year, and see where that leaves it.
Zakuska Posted February 10, 2007 Posted February 10, 2007 OK, lets have some light:-) A prophetic year is 360 days. We know when Israel was taken captive. We know that the Israel of Jesus day was not composed of the fulness of Israel, but they were scattered among the nations. They didn't repent and didn't return.Moses said if Israel didn't repent that God would multiply the punishment seven times. Do the math. How many days did the pophet lay on his sides? Multiply that by seven, divide by the 360 day prophetic year, and see where that leaves it.Yep thats the 1290 day prophecy... its something a little different than what we are talking about.
consiglieri Posted February 10, 2007 Posted February 10, 2007 It's math Consiglieri, and to my knowledge such simple math is not 'debunked' Yes indeed. And this "simple math" has also yielded similarly astounding prophecies in the text of Moby ****. Or did you already know that?Is it time to line up to worship the great white whale?Thar she blows, matey!--Consiglieri(Now this is really funny. I type in the four letters after Moby's first name, and the message board renders them all in asterixes! Perhaps this is a sign that this is the true name of God and cannot therefore be written out? It's no more far fetched than the Bible Code!)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.