Tacenda Posted July 5, 2012 Author Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) I have been providing answers by answering the questions from the link. How am I doing?You are doing well as always, I like the humble way you approach an apostate mormon like me, no, really I always appreciate the kindness you show, I'm really quite lame in my bible studies and don't deserve the attention I get from those who have done their homework. To make it easier for you, I'll pick the ones that I can't find on FAIR or anywhere else and get your feedback. And I'm aware there might or most likely won't be any answers. But if you like the challenge I'll see what I can do. Edited July 5, 2012 by Tacenda
selek1 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 You are doing well as always, I like the humble way you approach an apostate mormon like me, no, really I always appreciate the kindness you show, I'm really quite lame in my bible studies and don't deserve the attention I get from those who have done their homework. To make it easier for you, I'll pick the ones that I can't find on FAIR or anywhere else and get your feedback. And I'm aware there might or most likely won't be any. But if you like the challenge I'll see what I can do.As a courtesy, please post them in individual threads so that the responses don't get lost in the avalanche.
ERayR Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) I blame the parents. Edited July 5, 2012 by ERayR
ERayR Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) You are doing well as always, I like the humble way you approach an apostate mormon like me, no, really I always appreciate the kindness you show, I'm really quite lame in my bible studies and don't deserve the attention I get from those who have done their homework. To make it easier for you, I'll pick the ones that I can't find on FAIR or anywhere else and get your feedback. And I'm aware there might or most likely won't be any answers. But if you like the challenge I'll see what I can do.First analyze the question/statement made. Most of them fall apart on the surface. Spend more time in all your scriptures and will help. Edited July 5, 2012 by ERayR
why me Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Sixth question:Mormon Article of Faith #8: "We Believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." Why do you only add the phrase, "as far as it is translated correctly" to describe the Bible and not after the book of Mormon when in fact there are far more translating errors in the Book of Mormon than the Bible?The bible has been translated over and over again with various versions. For the lds, the king james version is accepted but there are many more out there and more continue to be published. I know of no other organization involved in giving us a different translation of the book of mormon. So, the phrase 'as far as it is tranlated correctly' has certain meaning for the bible.
why me Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 You are doing well as always, I like the humble way you approach an apostate mormon like me, no, really I always appreciate the kindness you show, I'm really quite lame in my bible studies and don't deserve the attention I get from those who have done their homework. To make it easier for you, I'll pick the ones that I can't find on FAIR or anywhere else and get your feedback. And I'm aware there might or most likely won't be any answers. But if you like the challenge I'll see what I can do.The thing is quite simple. The mormons have the book of mormon. How did the book become the book of mormon is the big question. In terms of view of the hebrews, david and emma claimed that joseph would stick his head in his hat and read off to a scribe what he saw in the hat. Hard to copy the view of the hebrews. FAIR has covered it quite well. But it all comes down to the book of mormon. If it is true...the church is true. If it is false, the church is false. All else is fluff.
KevinG Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 The Book of Mormon has to be translated correctly also. There have been some corrections from earlier editing mistakes and clarifications of certain phrases by later prophets.
why me Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 So I've been rather appalled by this argument used by apologists; some other argument needs to be made.I think that FAIR has made many arguments about the view of the hebrews. But the most interesting is the link that I provided when Joseph writing in TImes and Seasons mentions the View of the Hebrews as proof that the book of mormon has validity. I am sure that members were clamoring to get it. And when they did, they did not find any signs of copying. And the View wasn't used by antimormons until much after Joseph was murdered sometime at the beginning of the 20th century.
TAO Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) I haven't got any answers yet. Or am I up in the night? The reason I'm going around in circles is because I haven't received the answers. Show me where I have. Below I posted this. See what you think. I'm not anti, not at all, maybe a little dense sometimes.http://www.bible.ca/mor-questions.htmHow many of these questions put forth by this website could be answered by FAIR or any of you on this board? I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but need answers and my whole life depends on it. Facts, not feelings right now.I'll do some answers. Sorry if it sounds blunt; it's more of a response to their webpage, and not you yourself, okay =).Why did the angel take Nephi Plates back to heaven?Because God wanted him to. Honestly, there is no better reason than that. I believe though, it was partly to keep them safe from others who would destroy them, and also to test our faith.Do they not belong with man?They don't belong with man.Would not their existence prove once for all that Mormonism is truth?God isn't interested in proving Mormonism true, just as he is not interested in proving himself true. You will know of the truth of things after the trial of your faith.God allowed the Jews to carry the 10 commandments for several centuries in their original physical form, written by the finger of God Himself!Well, apparently God want them kept here. And I don't see the 10 commandments today, so I think he may have wanted them back as well."Will you, as a Mormon, please read the Bible cover to cover and ask God to reveal to you that it contains all of God's message to man and that parts are not lost or altered and that the Book of Mormon is false?"I just did. He said no; that the Book of Mormon is true.If the original 1830 Book of Mormon was inspired than why were there so many errors and changes and additions and deletions, when compared to current editions?Read the FAIR article why me talked about. As mentioned, most of these were scribal errors. The only two major changes were one where Benjamin and Mosiah got switched (but that's easily a scribal or speaking error), and how Christ replaced God in certain sections (however, Joseph Smith himself made the changes there, and considering God can mean either God the Father, Christ, or both, I think it's fine that he made the changes to make things clear). Many of the other changes are just small misspellings and such, along with a few changes due to words changing meaning from the 1800s to now (for example, the verse saying 'council the Lord thy God')."How can we be assured that the translation of the B of M into French or any other language is correct? Only the English translation is claimed to be inspired!"How can we be assured that the Bible's translations are inspired? Because they contain the word of God. Just because the Bible has errors doesn't mean it's not inspired. A similar case with the Book of Mormon in other languages. And even then, we have the original translation, and so, errors that have been made can be fixed, if and when they exist. We don't have the original text for all of the books of the Bible.How do you account for the stunning parallels in both content and order between the B of M and the View of the Hebrews, by Ethan Smith? Published in 1823 (7 years before the B of M) less than 100 miles from the Joseph Smith's parents home.There isn't too many stunning parallels lol. Again, look at the FAIR article on this issue. You have to be careful with making analogies, because for as much similarity there is on a few things, there is incredible different on nearly all things."Mormon Article of Faith #8: "We Believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." Why do you only add the phrase, "as far as it is translated correctly" to describe the Bible and not after the book of Mormon when in fact there are far more translating errors in the Book of Mormon than the Bible?"That is incorrect. There are far more errors in the Bible than in the Book of Mormon. Of course, I'm assuming your ignoring grammatical errors and such, because they really don't count as errors."If the Book of Mormon is true, then why has the Mormon church changed it? Examples are: 1 Nephi 11:21; 19:20; 20:1 and Alma 29:4. Compare these with the original Book of Mormon. (Gerald and Sandra Tanner have counted 3913 changes in the book of Mormon, excluding punctuation changes.)"Again, read the FAIR article. Changes Joseph Smith made to make it clearer when Christ was speaking. Changes due to changes in word meaning. And more. You have to be more creative than this in criticizing. Edited July 5, 2012 by TAO
TAO Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 "How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighed about 230 lbs. Gold, with a density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lbs. per cubic foot. The plates were 7" x 8" by about 6". See Articles of Faith, by Talmage, page 262, 34th ed.)"How do you know they were made of Gold, and not a similar metal that appeared Gold like in quality. Indeed, that is the prevailing theory currently; that they weren't made of 'real' Gold; they just looked like it."If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (Doc. & Cov. 132:17,37)"Because it's a figure of speech. He isn't actually an angel. I believe he is a ressurected being, or a spirit that will become a ressurected being when Christ wishes him too.Why do Mormons emphasize part of the Word of Wisdom and ignore the part forbidding the eating of meat except in winter, cold or famine? (Doc. & Cov. 89:12,13).Because the prophet (and thus God) doesn't emphasize this part of the Word of Wisdom very strongly at all.When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days or for three hours? (Luke 23:44 and 3 Nephi 8:19, 23).Different amounts in different places. Enjoy!"Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to Heaven?"Look at the FAIR article: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Moon_inhabitedJoseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original No. 11 been omitted?Yet another Fair article: http://en.fairmormon.org/Articles_of_Faith/Differing_versionsWhy did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever?Yet more FAIR. Question #45: http://en.fairmormon.org/Countercult_ministries/Contender_Ministries/Questions_All_Mormons_Should_Ask_Themselves/Questions_29-58How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood?Because God commanded it."Since Mormonism teaches that only God the Father had a physical body at the time Adam was created, why did God say, "Let us make man in OUR image"? Why didn't He say, "Let us make man in MY image?"Because spirits can look like real people; they just can't be physically touched, as they don't have a body.If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin?Virgin meant something different during Biblical time. It meant 'young girl', not 'a girl who had not been in a physical union' as it means today. Regardless, this is a well debated bit about Mormon theology; some believe it, some do not.How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon's while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple?Because it was smaller, and not made of precious materials: "save it were not built of so manydprecious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s etemple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of fSolomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine."Also, are we sure that the amount of men required to build Solomon's temple is an established factual figure?Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy?More FAIR!!!!: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Hiding_the_truthNext Question omittedNo temple talk on the board =).How do you explain the fact that 2 Nephi 16:2 is copied from an older version of the KJV of the Bible in Isa 6:2? This is proven because this older KJV (the mistake is corrected in current versions) made a rare gramatical error by using the incorrect plural form of "seraphims" rather than "seraphim".Can't find any answers to this specific question, however, as FAIR points out here (http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Plagiarism_accusations/King_James_Bible), it'd be counter-intuitive to copy out of the Bible if you were trying to fool people, due to the suspicion you would create.In any case, there's one section, and I'll wait to do more. Honestly, you shouldn't trust websites like these, because most of these questions are easily answered, or are on FAIR. I wouldn't worry about too much of their complaints.
Darren10 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 I have been providing answers by answering the questions from the link. How am I doing?Doin' good, sir. Doing good.
Darren10 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) The one thing, to which I take great exception, is the following FAIR statement (John Welch uses the same argument): "There are a significant number of differences between the two books, which are easily discovered upon reading Ethan Smith's work."When it comes to showing that one work was used to create another, "differences" are completely irrelevant and a confusing red herring.Let me give a personal example. I one wrote a lengthy article arguing that software should be treated as tangible personal property. It was rather groundbreaking, I might modestly state, at least at the time. Two years later, an obscure law journal published a piece three times the length of mine, reaching the opposite conclusion. But, it quoted word for word several paragraphs of my paper, including my particular odd turns of phrases. No attribution.When I confronted the author over this affront in a telephone call, he admitted that he had had my paper but said that he had never used it. When I confronted the obscure law school over this outrage, they responded by saying that it was not used because their paper came to a different conclusion. However, the law does not so provide, and instead you look to plagiarisms, and not differences.So I've been rather appalled by this argument used by apologists; some other argument needs to be made.Wow. So does the Book of mormon plagiarize Viw of the Hebrews? What parts, prithee? Edited July 5, 2012 by Darren10
ERayR Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 How do you know they were made of Gold, and not a similar metal that appeared Gold like in quality. Indeed, that is the prevailing theory currently; that they weren't made of 'real' Gold; they just looked like it.They were made of a gold allow and they were not a solid block of gold either. The sheets were most probably made of hammered sheets and wouldn't lay flat, leaving a lot of air space which weighs practically nothing. So now we are down to 75-100 pounds. Something quite manageable for a strapping farm kid.
Darren10 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Book of Mormon MetallurgyWhy does the Book of Mormon mention Bellows (1 Nephi 17:11), Brass (2 Nephi 5:15), Breast Plates & Copper (Mosiah 8:10), Iron (Jarom 1:8 , Gold and Silver currency (Alma 11), Silver (Jarom 1:8 , and Steel Swords (Ether 7:9)? No evidence indicates that these items existed during Book of Mormon times. Tom Ferguson: "Metallurgy does not appear in the region until about the 9th century A.D."Why doesn't the art (which is abundant) of the supposed Book of Mormon cultures portray the existence of metallurgical products or metallurgical activity?This is from Tacenda's link of difficult questions for Mormons to answer. First off is that Ether 7:9 does not mention "steel swords". And I don't think that steel is the sole product which rusts. Metallurgy was vast in ancient America, especially in South America. Meso america had some notible developments and in North America there was an abundant amount of copper around the Great Lakes.Here's other difficult questions: Book of Mormon Crops Why is plow agriculture such as Barley (Alma 11:7) and Wheat (Mosiah 9:9) included in the Book of Mormon when it didn't exist during that time period? "There's a whole system of production of wheat and barley . . . It's a specialized production of food. You have to know something to make flax [the source of linen], and especially in tropical climates. Grapes and olives . . . all these are cultures that are highly developed and amount to systems, and so the Book of Mormon is saying that these systems existed here." (BYU anthropology professor, Dr. Raymond T. Matheny, August 25, 1984 Sunstone conference in Salt Lake City). Welch claims barley existed in the Book of Mormon based on one find in Phoenix, Arizona! Arizona is hardly the setting of the Book of Mormon.Why aren't the foods known to ancient America such as chocolate, lima beans, squash, potatoes, tomatoes, manioc, etc. included in the Book of Mormon?The location in Arizona not withstanding, barley has been discovered in ancient America. See FAIR'S Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Plants (complete with video). In other words, barley is now known to have been cultivated in ancient America. So, once again, a source of criticism of the Book of mormon becomes a strength to authenticate it using the science of man. I don't know about grapes and olives but I do know that the more archeology discoveries ocurre the more the Book of Mormon is scientifically plausible. Though I don't need man's science to know it's true and nether should anyone else. Edited July 5, 2012 by Darren10
Freedom Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Facts probably, that the BOM is true. Actual landmarks of the BOM lands perhaps. Where the wars were played out, bones of those that died. The apologetics try and try to solve the mysteries in mormonism, but invariably it always ends up being left to the believer and his/her faith alone that is the only answer. As such is with the bible, so many don't believe the bible to be true, but atleast there are scrolls, landmarks and eyewitnesses in the bible.You asked, what is it about these verses that concern you? It is that I have to ask myself, is my religion and faith in it, worth, losing my faith in Jesus alone? Because in some Christian faiths, they stress that it's faith alone in Jesus, not of works. Works comes after the faith alone theory.Are you asking the same questions of the bible and the evangelical religion? You might be surprised to know that there is no evidence for any of the people or events in the bible either. You cannot prove people or events through archaeology. At least, it is very difficult to do so. I will find you proof for the Book of Mormon if you can find me proof of Jesus. Basing it on faith alone is a conundrum. Faith is an action. It is choosing to believe. But if no works are necessary, then no religion is necessary and the bible is not necessary. If all we needed to do was to believe, then the new testament would have been a small slip of paper stating as much. In stead, it is filled with council to obey, to work, to serve. We are advised not to fall away, not to forget the widows. If all we need do to is believe and the works will follow, then why are there Christians in prison? If works are a natural result of believing then there would be instructions on performing. It would be like having a manual on the importance of falling after you jump out of an airplane with a parachute, or instructions on getting wet after you jump into a swimming pool. Perhaps you can answer this question: Once a person is saved, are they no longer obliged to obey the commandments? Can I accept Jesus as my savior and then go and commit heinous crimes and still go to heaven? And another is: why did God not provide any evidence of the bible? Not only do we not have evidence, but we don't even have the original manuscript. Fundamentally, your concerns represent a blatant double standard.
LifeOnaPlate Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Tacenda, I wrote a review of Shawn McCraney's book. Do you have time to read it and give me some feedback? Please ignore the title, as it was not of my choosing. http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?reviewed_author&vol=21&num=2&id=774
Damien the Leper Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Worse- can you guess how many of my immediate and extended family fall under that particular umbrella?There's a reason FEMA won't approve plans for our family reunion...Oh, Selek...
why me Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Tacenda, I wrote a review of Shawn McCraney's book. Do you have time to read it and give me some feedback?Please ignore the title, as it was not of my choosing.http://maxwellinstit...21&num=2&id=774I remember a few years ago, we had a poster on this forum when it was owned by FAIR who went under the name: Born Again Mormon. I wonder if it were Shawn. You wrote a nice piece. Too bad about the title. The author should be allowed to choose his or her own title.
cdowis Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) It would have to be moderated and on at least neutral ground to make any sense at all. And even then, the viewer would need to appreciate scholarship as much as showmanship, to make it even. Not going to happen, IMO.Bottom line==I consider this forum is the only neutral ground worth considering. It overcomes the "charisma" factor of certain critics and allows the audience to see what they really have to offer. It allows us to give thoughtful and well researched answers.I was given an opportunity to participate on such a radio program to help out one of my apologist friends. I said no, and he ended up looking very foolish. One of those "Christians believe this.... and Mormons believe that" discussions. It basically became a Christian vs those Mormons. Edited July 5, 2012 by cdowis
Tacenda Posted July 5, 2012 Author Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Are you asking the same questions of the bible and the evangelical religion? You might be surprised to know that there is no evidence for any of the people or events in the bible either. You cannot prove people or events through archaeology. At least, it is very difficult to do so. I will find you proof for the Book of Mormon if you can find me proof of Jesus.Basing it on faith alone is a conundrum. Faith is an action. It is choosing to believe. But if no works are necessary, then no religion is necessary and the bible is not necessary. If all we needed to do was to believe, then the new testament would have been a small slip of paper stating as much. In stead, it is filled with council to obey, to work, to serve. We are advised not to fall away, not to forget the widows. If all we need do to is believe and the works will follow, then why are there Christians in prison? If works are a natural result of believing then there would be instructions on performing. It would be like having a manual on the importance of falling after you jump out of an airplane with a parachute, or instructions on getting wet after you jump into a swimming pool.Perhaps you can answer this question: Once a person is saved, are they no longer obliged to obey the commandments? Can I accept Jesus as my savior and then go and commit heinous crimes and still go to heaven?And another is: why did God not provide any evidence of the bible? Not only do we not have evidence, but we don't even have the original manuscript.Fundamentally, your concerns represent a blatant double standard.If there is no evidence, sorry archaelogical evidence, why are there bible tours, in fact I think Daniel Peterson would disagree on that point!Also, we have witnesses of Jesus Christ in the four gospels.And we have the Dead Sea Scrolls. What more do you need?Finally, you are judged on your works, but you are not saved by your works. Edited July 5, 2012 by Tacenda
mrmandias Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Assertion not in evidence. The only "evidence" to this allegation comes in word-of-mouth folklore passed down by interested (and invested) parties. There is no objective, independent evidence to support this assertion.One big difference is that the plates would tend to supply incontrovertible evidence of the church, whereas stones with commandments on them that the Jews claimed were from God wouldn't supply incontrovertible evidence of Judaism. It appears that while God occasionally allows miracles to be performed, He usually prefers to avoid incontrovertible proof and leave room for study and prayer and faith. In a way, this is a mercy. Remember the Jews who witnessed miracles but fell away when they stopped getting fed with food and with the messianic script they had in mind? Proof damned them. 1
LifeOnaPlate Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Thanks, why me. It isn't uncommon for review publications to have editors create the titles. My chief complaint with this title is that it has an entirely different feel to the review itself, and is thus jarring and distracting. Can't win them all.Tacenda, penny for your thoughts!http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?reviewed_author&vol=21&num=2&id=774
ERayR Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 If there is no evidence, sorry archaelogical evidence, why are there bible tours, in fact I think Daniel Petersen would disagree on that point!Also, we have witnesses of Jesus Christ in the four gospels.And we have the Dead Sea Scrolls. What more do you need?Finally you are judged on your works, but you are not saved by your works.Also, we have witnesses of Jesus Christ in the four gospels.Don't take this wrong I believe it but there is no archaeological evidence that Jesus Christ even lived. And we have the Dead Sea Scrolls. What more do you need?The Dead Sea scrolls are a record of a little community on the shores of the Dead Sea. They do not prove anything other than there was a community there and they had some different beliefs.Finally you are judged on your works, but you are not saved by your works.I think I can agree with this. However I think it is incomplete. I don't think salvation comes by faith alone but faith must be exhibited through your works. AS James puts it But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”
TAO Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 If there is no evidence, sorry archaelogical evidence, why are there bible tours, in fact I think Daniel Peterson would disagree on that point!He means there is no evidence or very little evidence for people like David, and Saul, and those earlier. And that's just their historical value; not relating to theological issues.Also, we have witnesses of Jesus Christ in the four gospels.Yes, that's one. But the Book of Mormon is one too.And we have the Dead Sea Scrolls. What more do you need?Written after many of these events happened.Finally, you are judged on your works, but you are not saved by your works.Of course. You are saved by Grace through Christ. But, your faith and works have a great effect on what you will be doing in the hereafter.
Calm Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 And lose everything? Because I would, lose everything. And I don't feel comfortable around the EV's yet. Only around my LDS bro's & sis. Is it because I'm use to them? I guess. Or is it that they, Ev's, don't have the "light" within them? I can't tell yet. Is this forum not a place for me? Maybe, you tell me. I'm just going where it's safe to get answers, sorry.Will is only one man with one man's opinion. Don't assume that one poster speaks for all in any case....except perhaps the mods....
Recommended Posts