Shawn Mcraney Begs For An Apologist/Scholar To Come On The Show

[ERayR]

That is not my argument nor my view. Not even remotely so. Why bother?

Simply, it is simply wrong to argue that the Book of Mormon did not use material from View of the Hebrews simply because of the differences.

It is akin to saying that Jesus did not quote from the OT because the NT is different.

Simply, it is simply wrong to argue that the Book of Mormon did not use material from View of the Hebrews simply because of the differences. similarities.

[ERayR]

Did you not get the point that it is pointless to call into his show. He doesn't want a discussion; he wants a chance to show his "superior" reasoning.

He is clearly yet another case of self diagnosed omniscience.

[Libs]

If Shawn admits to not being a scholar (which he did to Walker), why in the world is he appealing to LDS scholars to come on his show? He, himself, admits he is not equipped to engage.

[ERayR]

If Shawn admits to not being a scholar (which he did to Walker), why in the world is he appealing to LDS scholars to come on his show? He, himself, admits he is not equipped to engage.

He obviously thinks it will validate what he is doing if he can get notice and participation of legitimate scholars.

[altersteve]

Tacenda,

Here are my responses to these questions (http://www.bible.ca/mor-questions.htm).

Part 1 ("general questions"):

1. Why did the angel take Nephi Plates back to heaven? Do they not belong with man? Would not their existence prove once for all that Mormonism is truth? God allowed the Jews to carry the 10 commandments for several centuries in their original physical form, written by the finger of God Himself!

If we have the plates with us, then the divinity of Jesus Christ would be proven to the world. That's not what God wants right now. He wants to be the one to prove it to us, in our hearts and minds through His Spirit, not through physical evidence.

2. "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, as a Mormon, have no need to do this, as I have already received a witness from God that the Book of Mormon is true.

3. 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!

The Book of Mormon itself is claimed to be inspired, not any specific translation.

4. 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?

Clarifications are always needed as times change and as our understanding changes.

5. 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.

I believe there are far more differences between the two works than there are similarities. The similarities that do exist are rather general and are based on the presumption that the Book of Mormon takes place on the entire Western Hemisphere, which I don't believe it does. Also, as an aside, the fact that "View of the Hebrews" can be purchased from (and is published by) BYU makes it clear that the Church is not finding any difficulty with this issue.

6. 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 burden of proof is now on the person who asks this question to provide evidence that "there are far more translating errors in the Book of Mormon than the Bible."

7. 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.)

None of these changes affect the meaning of the verses in question. See the answer to question #4.

8. 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.)

I would rather go with the testimonies of eyewitnesses, who were all consistent that the plates weighed between 30 and 60 pounds.

9. If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (Doc. & Cov. 132:17,37)

Our description of Moroni as an angel is in reference to the most basic definition of the word, "messenger," and does not preclude him from exaltation.

10. 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).

The Word of Wisdom was not given "by way of commandment" and only some parts of the revelation have been accepted or interpreted as such by the Church leadership.

11. When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days or for three hours? (Luke 23:44 and 3 Nephi 8:19, 23).

Both. Three days in the New World (probably as a result of volcanic explosions) and three hours in the Old World.

12. 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? (The Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 3, pages 263-264. See repreint in Mormonism --Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, page 4.)

No, Joseph Smith was alleged to have said there were men living on the moon. There is no contemporary record of him saying this. But even if he did, it was a common belief and was consistent with the scientific understanding at the time.

13. Joseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original No. 11 been omitted? (Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 2, three pages after page 160, among the photos.)

Joseph Smith only prepared thirteen Articles of Faith in what is now known as the "Wentworth letter." A fourteenth about the physical resurrection of the body was inserted later in James H. Flanigan's 1849 revision of Joseph's original creed.

14. Why did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever? (Doc. & Cov. 124:56-60).

How convenient that verse 55 was ignored. Had it been included, it would be made clear that this scripture is not a prophecy that the Nauvoo House would stand "forever and ever," but rather a commandment to give Joseph Smith and his family a place to live "forever and ever."

15. How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood? (Numbers 16:40; Heb. 7:13,14).

That was a past policy, which the Lord, in His wisdom, decided to change.

16. 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?" (Gen. 1:26).

Our spirits are patterned after the physical image of our bodies, as we learn in the Book of Ether. Jesus Christ, therefore, had an "image" at the time, despite not having a body yet.

17. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, page 50).

Jesus was not conceived as a result of any physical union. Brigham Young's opinions on this matter do not reflect modern LDS doctrine.

18. 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? (1 Kings 5:13-18 and 2 Nephi 5:15-17).

Nephi acknowledges this and clarifies that only the construction and "exceedingly fine" workmanship were like Solomon's Temple (see 2 Nephi 5:16).

19. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doc. & Cov. 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324).

Some believe Joseph only saw his polygamous relationships as spiritual and that he, therefore, was not lying when he denied being married to anyone other than Emma. This is, at least, my understanding.

20. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made (Gen. 3:21). Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons in the secret temple ceremonies?

I do not wish to discuss this in detail, but we do not "memorialize" the Fall. We simply acknowledge that without it, there would be no room for growth.

21. 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".

I have no qualms with the idea of Joseph Smith using a KJV Bible as a reference guide in the translation of these verses.

There's a lot of questions here, but I'll try to get to all of them when I can.

Edited July 6, 2012 by altersteve

[volgadon]

Yes, he has gone on the show by telephone, maybe this is something for scholars on here to think about doing. He can always hang up on you if he feels flustered. He does ask that his callers be LDS only callers, so most of you qualify.

Perhaps I failed to communicate with enough clarity. McCraney is not interested in sincere discussion. As Deborah said, pointless, as Mola Ram said in even stronger terms, worthless. McCraney's offer was extended in as much good faith as the Zeitgeist challenge.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Tacenda:

I give it all the attention it deserves.

Well stated...lol

[Libs]

He obviously thinks it will validate what he is doing if he can get notice and participation of legitimate scholars.

He should be worried that he will likely be made to appear as even more of a fool.

[Calm]

He should be worried that he will likely be made to appear as even more of a fool.

From his history, I don't think that has actually occurred to him as a possibility. Edited July 6, 2012 by calmoriah

[ERayR]

He should be worried that he will likely be made to appear as even more of a fool.

With the controls in his hands? Zap!!

[Libs]

From his history, I don't think that has actually occurred to him as a possibility.

lol....probably not.

[Freedom]

I sent an email to the bible.ca website advising them that I found some misinformation on their site. They have an affiliated church in my neck of the woods, it would be interesting to see how they respond.

[cdowis]

1. Why did the angel take Nephi Plates back to heaven? Do they not belong with man? Would not their existence prove once for all that Mormonism is truth? God allowed the Jews to carry the 10 commandments for several centuries in their original physical form, written by the finger of God Himself!

Why didn't the resurrected Christ appear to Caesar, the Sanhedron, to Pilate. To have done so would have made it so much better for the Christians to preach the Gospel.

3. 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!

Over time, many of these have been replaced by superior translations. I know of a minor error in the German translation which is still there, despite multiple editions.

4. 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?

Skousen goes into great deal of detail to answer that question. In short, there are transcription and printer errors. None of the changes are significant doctrinal issues, and most are punctuation errors.

7. 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.

These changes reflect cultural assumptions, such as the phrase "the mother of God", which, for obvious reasons, was changed to the "mother of the son of God" to avoid confusion in meaning.

(Gerald and Sandra Tanner have counted 3913 changes in the book of Mormon, excluding punctuation changes.)

You are mistaken. Look again.

Tanners themselves admitted that there are less than a dozen "significant" errors, and the rest were punctuation. Do your homework.

8. 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.)

Read what the eight witnesses said, that the plates had the "appearance" of gold. No one has claimed that they were pure gold, and witnesses agree that they weighted about 40 pounds, probably a gold alloy.

This question pretty much demonstrates that you are an antimormon, not looking for the truth but to deceive.

9. If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (Doc. & Cov. 132:17,37)

God is able to judge us, so why don't you ask Him yourself. The Lord does not need to answer to anyone on what He does.

10. 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).

It is not ignored, but some parts are not emphasized. Many LDS take that commandment literally.

12. 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? (The Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 3, pages 263-264. See repreint in Mormonism --Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, page 4.)

Joseph Smith Jr made no such statement, but there is some evidence that his father Joseph Smith may have referred to it while giving a blessing. In any case, this is based on a hoax report in a contemporary newspaper, and everybody was talking about it.

15. How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood? (Numbers 16:40; Heb. 7:13,14).

Paul tells us that there was a change in the priesthood, Heb 7:12. Why don't you read your Bible?

16. 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?" (Gen. 1:26).

The use of the "royal we", or in this case, the "divine we"

18. 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? (1 Kings 5:13-18 and 2 Nephi 5:15-17).

1.Why don't you read the Bible. Most of the work had to do with preparing the ground because it was built on a mountain.

2. The Nephite temple was not as elaborate as Solomon's temple.

3.Thank you. You have now given us proof of the "others" who also assisted in the building.

19. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doc. & Cov. 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324).

The practice of polygamy was restricted, and not open to all members of the church. Any one practicing polygamy without the express permission of the Prophet would be excommunicated.

In any case, he would not have been given a chance to explain the fine points of the doctrine before the enemies of the church would have killed him and destroyed the church over the issue. He was protecting the church and its members.

20. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made (Gen. 3:21). Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons in the secret temple ceremonies?

Why don't you become worthy of a temple recommend and find out yourself. In the meantime we do not discuss temple content.

21. 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".

Need to check Skouson on this. May simply have been a copy error. a transcription error, printer error (perhaps he was using the KJV to assist him in setting the type).

The BOM itself admits to the possibility of human errors. In any case, no big deal -- one angel or several.

Edited July 7, 2012 by cdowis

[Storm Rider]

Thanks for your words, they hit home alot. I have heard some hell & damnation sermons on TV. Definately not for me, otoh I think some of my ward's sacrament meetings leave alot to be desired. I guess my feelings do matter and I appreciate the scripture you provided. I need to probably do as we're always told, read the scriptures and pray about it. I had no idea that so many on here go after the lost like this, I'm very touched by it.

There is great wisdom in encouraging each other to read scriptures, contemplate, and pray. Many within Christianity urge their adherents to follow this counsel. However, I have empathy for those who feel they do this and still do not receive any answers or direction.

When I was younger, but after I had been active in the Church for several years, I felt I really needed a greater testimony of the Book of Mormon. I had been reading and praying, but still wanted something more. At one point I chose to begin fasting and decided I would not stop until I had received the witness I was looking for. I began my fast in prayer and then went camping so that I could be alone where I could read, contemplate and pray without any interference. After three days of this I was praying mightily and the witness I received was, in summary, what are you doing? I have already given you a witness of its truth; quit being silly and live what you know to be true. Needless to say I felt throughly chastened. I wanted my burning bush in place of all the times the still, small voice had whispered to me. I realized how arrogant I was to presume exactly what type of witness I needed and what was not acceptable.

Those who grow up in the Church do not often talk about a specific point where they received a giant witness to the truthfulness of the Gospel. However, they have received these small, delicate whisperings of the Spirit. When we receive witnesses we all would be better to immediately use that to strengthen our foundation in Christ. There is no need for another witness about that specific thing at the time of our choosing and in the magnitude of our choosing.

Hearing stories about Joseph or Brigham; wanting something more from the current prophet or the members; none of these should take away from the witness that we have already received. As a lover and student of history for my entire life, I will say this; history as reported to us by men is but a shadow of the lives lived. We are never able to grasp all of the variables, reasons, or the context of what we think is history. Often it is said that history is written by the victors. This should always be remembered and understood. History is not mathmatics; it is the work of good men that strive to report on that which occured in the past.

[Tacenda]

Stormrider I appreciate your kindness of relaying that story of fasting for a great witness for the BOM and getting told you've had it all along. I've always believed in the BOM my entire life it seems, and maybe because it is an inspired book. The stumbling block I'm going through now is whether to believe Jesus is God in carnate or he is my brother. And whether there was a preexistence or whether we were created from the dust of the earth. Like I've stated before I bought a copy of the original BOM and it reads as if it is the trinity. And nothing about temple work etc. which is entirely what our doctrines are based on now. And the crux of it being, when I make die will I be going to hell if I didn't get that regenerative heart and believe it is only through Him and nothing I do, but what I do because of that gift. That's the problem. I wasn't aware of the differences that divide us from the others surrounding the Godhead. In my church life it was very social and I just accepted my callings etc. and didn't delve into doctrine much, like so many do. Never liked reading scriptures, though I tried. Preferred reading the Ensign and read it cover to cover monthly. So pretty bad I know. That's it in a nutshell, but I do have to say I continually felt stirrings that the church is true, as long as I stayed close to those that believe. But then the external existence of non believers came along and boom it all came down. My foundation was hideous and I blame myself and maybe some well meaning folks that didn't want anything to show that church wasn't as perfect starting out.

[TAO]

Stormrider I appreciate your kindness of relaying that story of fasting for a great witness for the BOM and getting told you've had it all along. I've always believed in the BOM my entire life it seems, and maybe because it is an inspired book. The stumbling block I'm going through now is whether to believe Jesus is God in carnate or he is my brother.

Well...What if he is both? Both God, along with Heavenly Father (two separate beings), and our spiritual Brother.

And whether there was a preexistence or whether we were created from the dust of the earth.

If you read Genesis carefully, you discover that there are actually 2 creations. There is one before that verse, and one after. The first represents the spiritual creation, and the second represents the physical.

Of course, you can also interpret that to mean simply that it's 1 creation that is out of order, but that seems a bit weird.

The 1st creation would be the spiritual creation, whereas the second, the physical creation; would be related to the dust of the Earth.

In any case, the pre-existence is your choice to believe in. I think it helps make some things a lot easier to explain. Like, why we are down here on Earth, for instance. It's much more fulfilling (at least to me) to explain the reason as 'it was our choice, so that we could help in God's plan', over a simple 'Because God wanted to'. The second answer, at least for me, just generates more questions. I realize it's a totally valid answer, but at least for me, the first one is a bit more preferable.

Like I've stated before I bought a copy of the original BOM and it reads as if it is the trinity.

What about the verses in 3rd Nephi: "And now Father, I pray unto thee for them, and also for all those who shall believe on their words, that they may believe in me, that Imay be in them as thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one." (3rd Nephi 19:23) and the likes?

And some more here: http://www.lds.org/s...&book=bofm/3-ne

I'm not quite sure what the original one said, but I'm pretty sure it shows in several places them being separate beings with separate spirits, though they are one God.

And nothing about temple work etc. which is entirely what our doctrines are based on now.

Why does that matter, if God commands it?

And the crux of it being, when I make die will I be going to hell if I didn't get that regenerative heart and believe it is only through Him and nothing I do, but what I do because of that gift. That's the problem. I wasn't aware of the differences that divide us from the others surrounding the Godhead. In my church life it was very social and I just accepted my callings etc. and didn't delve into doctrine much, like so many do. Never liked reading scriptures, though I tried. Preferred reading the Ensign and read it cover to cover monthly. So pretty bad I know. That's it in a nutshell, but I do have to say I continually felt stirrings that the church is true, as long as I stayed close to those that believe. But then the external existence of non believers came along and boom it all came down. My foundation was hideous and I blame myself and maybe some well meaning folks that didn't want anything to show that church wasn't as perfect starting out.

Well, now you just have to fix it. It'll be hard yes, but, it'll be worthwhile. The main thing is just obtaining a testimony. I know people say that a lot, but really there is no more important thing in the church. You have to have a personal witness that God is there, and that he wants you to do specific things. Otherwise, it's too easy to get lost as people say "Lo God's here", and "Lo God's there". There is simply too many forms of religion to decide between for things to be simpler. You have to ask.

Asking also has other benefits. You know those questions you are asking, about the Godhead and such? You can ask him those personally, and obtain your own question answered. I can't guarantee it will be in a way you expect (oftentimes, God completely suprises me with how he answers - the detail, and extraneous information are quite amazing), but I can guarantee you that you will feel much more satisfied by the answer he gives you over the ones that anybody else does. Because you know it's the truth; it came from him, and nobody else. That is why it's such a useful thing to have the Holy Spirit with you for this thing. =)

Edited July 7, 2012 by TAO

[Tacenda]

Well...What if he is both? Both God, along with Heavenly Father (two separate beings), and our spiritual Brother.

If you read Genesis carefully, you discover that there are actually 2 creations. There is one before that verse, and one after. The first represents the spiritual creation, and the second represents the physical.

Of course, you can also interpret that to mean simply that it's 1 creation that is out of order, but that seems a bit weird.

The 1st creation would be the spiritual creation, whereas the second, the physical creation; would be related to the dust of the Earth.

In any case, the pre-existence is your choice to believe in. I think it helps make some things a lot easier to explain. Like, why we are down here on Earth, for instance. It's much more fulfilling (at least to me) to explain the reason as 'it was our choice, so that we could help in God's plan', over a simple 'Because God wanted to'. The second answer, at least for me, just generates more questions. I realize it's a totally valid answer, but at least for me, the first one is a bit more preferable.

What about the verses in 3rd Nephi: "And now Father, I pray unto thee for them, and also for all those who shall believe on their words, that they may believe in me, that Imay be in them as thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one." (3rd Nephi 19:23) and the likes?

And some more here: http://www.lds.org/s...&book=bofm/3-ne

I'm not quite sure what the original one said, but I'm pretty sure it shows in several places them being separate beings with separate spirits, though they are one God.

Why does that matter, if God commands it?

Well, now you just have to fix it. It'll be hard yes, but, it'll be worthwhile. The main thing is just obtaining a testimony. I know people say that a lot, but really there is no more important thing in the church. You have to have a personal witness that God is there, and that he wants you to do specific things. Otherwise, it's too easy to get lost as people say "Lo God's here", and "Lo God's there". There is simply too many forms of religion to decide between for things to be simpler. You have to ask.

Asking also has other benefits. You know those questions you are asking, about the Godhead and such? You can ask him those personally, and obtain your own question answered. I can't guarantee it will be in a way you expect (oftentimes, God completely suprises me with how he answers - the detail, and extraneous information are quite amazing), but I can guarantee you that you will feel much more satisfied by the answer he gives you over the ones that anybody else does. Because you know it's the truth; it came from him, and nobody else. That is why it's such a useful thing to have the Holy Spirit with you for this thing. =)

I say this site is addicting for a reason, people like you and several on this board witnessing to the likes of me. Thank you, oh so much for that and for prompting me to go to the Lord with it. But I need to say this, Shawn ( I don't believe everything he says) tells people to go to the Lord with it also. Are they getting the answers he says they should ask also? It's so very hard as you already know. But I thank you for not coming down on me for the things I've said. Like a few tend to do on here, no patience for the retardness that people like me, in their eyes, have I guess.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Tacenda

[cdowis]

The stumbling block I'm going through now is whether to believe Jesus is God in carnate or he is my brother.

The answer is simple. He is both.

And whether there was a preexistence or whether we were created from the dust of the earth. Like I've stated before I bought a copy of the original BOM and it reads as if it is the trinity.

The LDS church accepts the trinity, the Godhead, but rejects the doctrine of "one substance". This false doctrine is found nowhere in the BOM.

And nothing about temple work etc. which is entirely what our doctrines are based on now.

The BOM contains the "fullness"of the gospel, but not the entirety of the gospel. Check out those two words in the dictionary.

And the crux of it being, when I make die will I be going to hell if I didn't get that regenerative heart and believe it is only through Him and nothing I do, but what I do because of that gift.

You are perhaps talking about going to Heaven, or living in the presence of the Son. To reside in the presence of the Father, you must receive and abide by the covenants that He has given us.

If you reject those covenants you cannot live with the Father.

That's the problem. I wasn't aware of the differences that divide us from the others surrounding the Godhead.

The fullness of the Gospel is found only in the LDS church.

Edited July 7, 2012 by cdowis

[ERayR]

Stormrider I appreciate your kindness of relaying that story of fasting for a great witness for the BOM and getting told you've had it all along. I've always believed in the BOM my entire life it seems, and maybe because it is an inspired book. The stumbling block I'm going through now is whether to believe Jesus is God in carnate or he is my brother. And whether there was a preexistence or whether we were created from the dust of the earth. Like I've stated before I bought a copy of the original BOM and it reads as if it is the trinity. And nothing about temple work etc. which is entirely what our doctrines are based on now. And the crux of it being, when I make die will I be going to hell if I didn't get that regenerative heart and believe it is only through Him and nothing I do, but what I do because of that gift. That's the problem. I wasn't aware of the differences that divide us from the others surrounding the Godhead. In my church life it was very social and I just accepted my callings etc. and didn't delve into doctrine much, like so many do. Never liked reading scriptures, though I tried. Preferred reading the Ensign and read it cover to cover monthly. So pretty bad I know. That's it in a nutshell, but I do have to say I continually felt stirrings that the church is true, as long as I stayed close to those that believe. But then the external existence of non believers came along and boom it all came down. My foundation was hideous and I blame myself and maybe some well meaning folks that didn't want anything to show that church wasn't as perfect starting out.

I bought a copy of the original BOM and it reads as if it is the trinity. That is because you are looking at it through Trinitarian eyes. It can be read from lds revealed doctrine POV just as easily. Depends on your understanding.

[TAO]

I say this site is addicting for a reason, people like you and several on this board witnessing to the likes of me. Thank you, oh so much for that and for prompting me to go to the Lord with it. But I need to say this, Shawn ( I don't believe everything he says) tells people to go to the Lord with it also. Are they getting the answers he says they should ask also? It's so very hard as you already know.

Mmm... I'm not sure if I am witnessing... I guess =p.

In any case, they could be getting answers too. That isn't for me to say yes or no too; because I am not in their position; I did not experience the things they did.

But I thank you for not coming down on me for the things I've said. Like a few tend to do on here, no patience for the retardness that people like me, in their eyes, have I guess.

Don't be too hard on yourself. =)

And yeah, I know others are a bit impatient, but in the least case, you can know we all are fallible. That's one of their weaknesses, just as I have weaknesses, and you have weaknesses. We all eventually have to overcome them, that we do.

Good luck on your quest for answers,

Best of Wishes,

-TAO

[ERayR]

Like a few tend to do on here, no patience for the retardness that people like me, in their eyes, have I guess.

Tacenda please don't take all that is written personally. I have found that you, at least most of the time, will consider what is presented.

[Tacenda]

Tacenda please don't take all that is written personally. I have found that you, at least most of the time, will consider what is presented.

That's true, and I appreciate, though don't always like it, when you and other's may be right.

[Tacenda]

Tacenda,

Here are my responses to these questions (http://www.bible.ca/mor-questions.htm).

Part 1 ("general questions"):

1. Why did the angel take Nephi Plates back to heaven? Do they not belong with man? Would not their existence prove once for all that Mormonism is truth? God allowed the Jews to carry the 10 commandments for several centuries in their original physical form, written by the finger of God Himself!

If we have the plates with us, then the divinity of Jesus Christ would be proven to the world. That's not what God wants right now. He wants to be the one to prove it to us, in our hearts and minds through His Spirit, not through physical evidence.

2. "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, as a Mormon, have no need to do this, as I have already received a witness from God that the Book of Mormon is true.

3. 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!

The Book of Mormon itself is claimed to be inspired, not any specific translation.

4. 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?

Clarifications are always needed as times change and as our understanding changes.

5. 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.

I believe there are far more differences between the two works than there are similarities. The similarities that do exist are rather general and are based on the presumption that the Book of Mormon takes place on the entire Western Hemisphere, which I don't believe it does. Also, as an aside, the fact that "View of the Hebrews" can be purchased from (and is published by) BYU makes it clear that the Church is not finding any difficulty with this issue.

6. 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 burden of proof is now on the person who asks this question to provide evidence that "there are far more translating errors in the Book of Mormon than the Bible."

7. 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.)

None of these changes affect the meaning of the verses in question. See the answer to question #4.

8. 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.)

I would rather go with the testimonies of eyewitnesses, who were all consistent that the plates weighed between 30 and 60 pounds.

9. If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (Doc. & Cov. 132:17,37)

Our description of Moroni as an angel is in reference to the most basic definition of the word, "messenger," and does not preclude him from exaltation.

10. 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).

The Word of Wisdom was not given "by way of commandment" and only some parts of the revelation have been accepted or interpreted as such by the Church leadership.

11. When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days or for three hours? (Luke 23:44 and 3 Nephi 8:19, 23).

Both. Three days in the New World (probably as a result of volcanic explosions) and three hours in the Old World.

12. 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? (The Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 3, pages 263-264. See repreint in Mormonism --Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, page 4.)

No, Joseph Smith was alleged to have said there were men living on the moon. There is no contemporary record of him saying this. But even if he did, it was a common belief and was consistent with the scientific understanding at the time.

13. Joseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original No. 11 been omitted? (Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 2, three pages after page 160, among the photos.)

Joseph Smith only prepared thirteen Articles of Faith in what is now known as the "Wentworth letter." A fourteenth about the physical resurrection of the body was inserted later in James H. Flanigan's 1849 revision of Joseph's original creed.

14. Why did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever? (Doc. & Cov. 124:56-60).

How convenient that verse 55 was ignored. Had it been included, it would be made clear that this scripture is not a prophecy that the Nauvoo House would stand "forever and ever," but rather a commandment to give Joseph Smith and his family a place to live "forever and ever."

15. How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood? (Numbers 16:40; Heb. 7:13,14).

That was a past policy, which the Lord, in His wisdom, decided to change.

16. 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?" (Gen. 1:26).

Our spirits are patterned after the physical image of our bodies, as we learn in the Book of Ether. Jesus Christ, therefore, had an "image" at the time, despite not having a body yet.

17. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, page 50).

Jesus was not conceived as a result of any physical union. Brigham Young's opinions on this matter do not reflect modern LDS doctrine.

18. 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? (1 Kings 5:13-18 and 2 Nephi 5:15-17).

Nephi acknowledges this and clarifies that only the construction and "exceedingly fine" workmanship were like Solomon's Temple (see 2 Nephi 5:16).

19. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doc. & Cov. 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324).

Some believe Joseph only saw his polygamous relationships as spiritual and that he, therefore, was not lying when he denied being married to anyone other than Emma. This is, at least, my understanding.

20. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made (Gen. 3:21). Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons in the secret temple ceremonies?

I do not wish to discuss this in detail, but we do not "memorialize" the Fall. We simply acknowledge that without it, there would be no room for growth.

21. 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".

I have no qualms with the idea of Joseph Smith using a KJV Bible as a reference guide in the translation of these verses.

There's a lot of questions here, but I'll try to get to all of them when I can.

Okay, whenever you wish too, and if that's never, and you've better things to do, I already believe you could probably answer them! And maybe it's time I try and search the answers like you have. Thank you for the time and effort!

[ERayR]

Okay, whenever you wish too, and if that's never, and you've better things to do, I already believe you could probably answer them! And maybe it's time I try and search the answers like you have. Thank you for the time and effort!

I think that personal search is really more rewarding. That however does not mean you have to go it alone. It always helps that after the study, research and meditation you have someone to discuss the sticky issues with.

[Freedom]

Tacenda;

When ever you go to a website such as the one you linked to, you have to put the questions into the context of who the presenter is. Their entire mission is to bring people to their own church by proving others wrong. They propose to teach truth by attacking other religions. This is, in my opinion, evil. From reading the responses that some have provided, it is clear that the website does not even pretend to present truth. They are distorting the teachings of many other religions, not just Mormons. Read some of the comments they say about Catholics and Muslims.

They do not even state what 'expert' they relied on to get the information for their site. They don't source any of the material so we are to simply assume they are being truthful. It is not possible to attack someone and be truthful. If yous seek to find fault, you must be of the position that there is no virtue in your target.

When they say 'horse feature prominently in the Book of Mormon' I have to ask: really? Not the one I am reading. When they see the word 'chariot' and assume 'wheels' they are either profoundly ignorant or intentionally deceptive. Based on the material on their site, it is clear they are the latter.

I am still interested in your distinction between being saved by faith and being judged according to works. If the evangelicals have it right, what is the difference?