The conensus on if the BoM is directly from God.

[cdowis]

11 hours ago, Gervin said:

Glad to help.  Easy.  We know much about jade in Mesoamerica.  It was mined, it was traded, it was used in religious ceremonies, it was buried with the dead, and it was fashioned into a wide-range of iconographic figures, symbols, and utilitarian objects.  In other words, it was valued and valuable.  It was part of the cultures of the region.  It played a role in the religion.  

The Book of Mormon is totally silent on jade or any inference to jade.  So, there is no reason to believe that Nephites occupied or interacted with the Mesoamerican culture.  At least based on your jade necklace example.  

Is there another artifact you'd like me to look at? 

Alma 17:14 ...their hearts were set upon riches, or upon gold and silver, and precious stones;

Also, jade were vital components of weapons of war.

And, of course you are aware of the logical fallacy "Argument from silence", and your post is an excellent example of that fallacy. 

 

Edited October 5, 2016 by cdowis

[Guest]

On September 26, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Tacenda said:

Today I found out that the word Atonement was made up by someone in the 1600's. How come it is in the BoM then? Is this just another anachronism that has been shuffled off as maybe Joseph Smith switching a word to help the reader understand? 

And did JS really read word for word on the Seerstone coming from God. If so, how did this word get in the BoM. I'm sure many of you have an answer and this is probably a non-issue. 

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng

"According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument."

 

 

I wonder (if this is true) why every Christian Faith, knows the word and what it means. Because the Jews, know quite well the meaning and use as the "Day of Atonement", a day that how ancient importance upon all Jewish and Christian. The word or the action taken upon these days stretching back (at least) for over 4,000 years. 

[canard78]

3 hours ago, cdowis said:

Do you understand how to validate a research methodology?  Please tell us.

If methodology tells you that Whitman's poems (post 1830) are more highly related to the BOM text than "The Late War"', what does that that mean, what does that tell you about your methodology?  See the extensive scientific analysis that concludes that the Book of Mormon was based on "Leaves of Grass"  http://www.jefflindsay.com/bomsource.shtml

Ask someone who has experience in scientific research and statistical analysis == they will explain it to you about validation.  Don't take my word for  because Mormons are liars, right,?  We just "want to snark around and argue" like brainless morons, RIGHT?????

Anyway, no need go respond because I will no longer be able to see your posts.  Bye,  and best of luck to you.

FWIW, baselines and statistical analysis is very much a part of my job. 

Seems you've put me on ignore but I'll answer the substance of your post anyway, for the sake of the thread. 

The thing about a base line is that you look at it both before and after the event you're evaluating. 

People often work on the premise that Joseph needed a source to copy/plagiarise from. As such, non-believers have to amass a library of books he could copy from and apologists work to show that he didn't have access to those books.

My theory isn't based on plagiarism. As such, the baseline both before and after the event (the dictation of the Book of Mormon) is important. If the Book of Mormon is a product of its time then it would be reasonable to expect the baseline to continue both before and after its publication. The Book of Mormon is an event/outlier in its depth and sophistication, but linguistically and theologically it still fits into the context it was published in. 

As one example (among many):

Theories about the origins of the native Americans had a existing set of theories before and after the BoM's publication. The BoM's theories on the first inhabitants weren't completely outside the base theories (though they stretched and adapted existing schools of thought). After its publication those theories also continued to be promoted. 

I'll have a look and Jeff's links because, based on my theory, post 1830s publications are as important as pre 1830s. 

Not because they are a possible source for plagiarism, but because they help establish the base. 

[ksfisher]

3 hours ago, cdowis said:

 

Also, jade were vital components of weapons of war.

 

 

Are you thinking of obsidian here?  I believe that jade was to valuable and rare in mesoamerica to  be used in all but ceremonial weapons.

Edited October 5, 2016 by ksfisher

[ksfisher]

4 hours ago, Gervin said:

 

The Book of Mormon is totally silent on jade or any inference to jade.  So, there is no reason to believe that Nephites occupied or interacted with the Mesoamerican culture.  At least based on your jade necklace example. 

The Book of Mormon is also silent on grass (except when quoting the bible).  Does that mean we need to look for the Nephites in grassless landscape?

[bcuzbcuz]

6 hours ago, ksfisher said:

The Book of Mormon is also silent on grass (except when quoting the bible).  Does that mean we need to look for the Nephites in grassless landscape?

And chocolate, and...

Corn, beans and squash were domesticated in Mesoamerica around 3500 BCE. Potatoes, quinoa and manioc were domesticated in South America. In what is now the eastern United States, Native Americans domesticated sunflower and sumpweed around 2500 BCE.

Ancient American Crops:
Cereals:    Maize (corn), maygrass, and little barley
Pseudocereals:    Amaranth, quinoa, erect knotweed, sumpweed, and sunflowers
Pulses:    Common beans, tepary beans, scarlet runner beans, lima beans, and peanuts
Fiber:    Mexican cotton, yucca, and agave
Roots and Tubers:    Jicama, manioc (cassava), potatoes, sweet potatoes, sunchokes, oca, mashua, ulloco, arrowroot, yacon, leren, and groundnuts
Fruits:    Tomatoes, chili peppers, avocados, cranberries, blueberries, huckleberries, cherimoyas, papayas, pawpaws, passionfruit, pineapples, soursops and strawberries
Melons:    Squashes

Meat and poultry:    Turkey, bison, venison, muscovy ducks, and guinea pigs

Nuts:    Peanut, black walnuts, shagbark hickory, pecans and hickory nuts
Other:    Chocolate, canna, tobacco, chicle, rubber, maple syrup, birch syrup and vanilla

[cdowis]

6 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Are you thinking of obsidian here?  I believe that jade was to valuable and rare in mesoamerica to  be used in all but ceremonial weapons.

You're correct.  I was confused.

[cdowis]

But it does mention sheum -- probably amaranth or something similar.

[champatsch]

7 hours ago, canard78 said:

The Book of Mormon is an event/outlier in its depth and sophistication, but linguistically and theologically it still fits into the context it was published in.

This statement is inaccurate and misleading. Compared to pseudo-biblical texts like The Late War, the Book of Mormon is deeply and extensively archaic, in a way not seen in hundreds of years.  And it is different from the King James Bible in so many respects that it cannot be derived from following its language.

[canard78]

51 minutes ago, champatsch said:

This statement is inaccurate and misleading. Compared to pseudo-biblical texts like The Late War, the Book of Mormon is deeply and extensively archaic, in a way not seen in hundreds of years.  And it is different from the King James Bible in so many respects that it cannot be derived from following its language.

Can you give me some examples?

I'd be interested in a few specific chapters of your choosing. Perhaps we could then both have a go at showing how it is or isn't linguistically of its time. 

[champatsch]

OK. The BofM has 12 "had spake"s, 1 "had been spake", and a few "of which hath been spoken".  Can you find these in the Bible, in pseudo-biblical texts?  When was "had spake" used most commonly in English. When do you find "had been spake" and "of which hath been spoken"?

[notHagoth7]

28 minutes ago, champatsch said:

OK. The BofM has 12 "had spake"s, 1 "had been spake", and a few "of which hath been spoken".  Can you find these in the Bible, in pseudo-biblical texts?  When was "had spake" used most commonly in English. When do you find "had been spake" and "of which hath been spoken"?

"From Middle English speken ‎(“to speak”), from Old English specan ‎(“to speak”), alteration of earlier sprecan ‎(“to speak”), from Proto-Germanic *sprekaną ‎(“to speak, make a sound”), from Proto-Indo-European *spreg- ‎(“to make a sound, utter, speak”). Cognate with West Frisian sprekke, Low German spreken ‎(“to speak”), Dutch spreken ‎(“to speak”), German sprechen ‎(“to speak”), Swedish språk ‎(“language”) and also with Albanian shpreh ‎(“to utter, voice, express”) through Indo-European."

This is half of a bridge - or the first hand of an eventual lengthy clap.

Might soon extend the other hand, the other puzzle piece, to complete the clap and to bridge the final gap. 

 

Edited October 5, 2016 by notHagoth7

[Larry Cotrell]

17 hours ago, canard78 said:

Your option 1 needs more substance. 

What else do I need? (I don't mean this in a sarcastic or rhetorical way, I am honestly asking what else you want to know)

17 hours ago, canard78 said:

I'm not your guy to debate option 2. I barely believe in a creator. I don't worry about a biblical satan who goes around inventing tangent religions to distract people from whatever schism of Christianity that you happen to believe is the right one. 

I'm not one of those guys who says my schism of Christianity is the only true one. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox (like Greek and Russian Orthodox) are all in the ballpark. Ultimately, God won't decide who goes to heaven and hell based on what church they go to but what they believe about Him. However, there is a difference between believing a different kind of Christianity and believing a false gospel.

Matthew 24:11

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many."
 

[Kevin Christensen]

17 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

What else do I need? (I don't mean this in a sarcastic or rhetorical way, I am honestly asking what else you want to know)

I'm not one of those guys who says my schism of Christianity is the only true one. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox (like Greek and Russian Orthodox) are all in the ballpark. Ultimately, God won't decide who goes to heaven and hell based on what church they go to but what they believe about Him. However, there is a difference between believing a different kind of Christianity and believing a false gospel.

Matthew 24:11

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many."
 

The reference to false prophets is exactly why I posted a link to a detailed essay called Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets which gathers 28 distinct tests for prophets from the Bible, gathers many passages showing what a seeker ought to do to see truth, many passages showing arguments made by Biblical peoples to reject true prophets, among other things.   I did find it interesting that the two or three best known of the tests also turn out to the ones most abused in practice.

Just in case it was overlooked.  Again.

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[cdowis]

28 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I'm not one of those guys who says my schism of Christianity is the only true one. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox (like Greek and Russian Orthodox) are all in the ballpark. Ultimately, God won't decide who goes to heaven and hell   based on what church they go to but what they believe about Him. However, there is a difference between believing a different kind of Christianity and believing a false gospel.

Let's put this into plain language.

"Which church is actually true is not relevant  but I do know who is going to heaven, and who is going to hell.  And those false prophets and their followers are going to burn burn burn in hell fire and damnation."

Edited October 5, 2016 by cdowis

[notHagoth7]

1 hour ago, Larry Cotrell said:

...and believing a false gospel.

Matthew 24:11

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many."

You've offered a half truth. What when the other shoe of *that* aspect of His message drops?:

Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

An incomplete, snipped-off message that makes a caricature of the fuller message, *is* a false message. A half truth.

So what is it that you're actually teaching when you happen to do that? Especially when *both* false messengers, *and* true messengers were foretold.

To claim that only wolves would come would errantly encourage Christians to shoot *any* messenger that says "Baa..."

 

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

Thoughts?

 

Edited October 5, 2016 by notHagoth7

[Larry Cotrell]

48 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Let's put this into plain language.

"Which church is actually true is not relevant  but I do know who is going to heaven, and who is going to hell. 

I do not know who is going to hell. But I know that those who reject Jesus are going there because that is what the Bible says. 

Ezekiel 18:20 - The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

But here's the good news:

Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Ultimately God is the judge, not me. However he clearly explains in the Bible how he will judge.

53 minutes ago, cdowis said:

And those false prophets and their followers are going to burn burn burn in hell fire and damnation."

Yes, and there is such thing as a false Christ.

2 Corinthians 11:1-15

Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles. But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things. Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service. And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself. As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia. Wherefore? because I love you not? God knoweth. But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

 

[Larry Cotrell]

26 minutes ago, notHagoth7 said:

A half truth.

What when the other shoe of *that* aspect of his message drops?:

Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

An incomplete, snipped-off message that makes a caricature of the fuller message, *is* a false message. A half truth.

So what is it that you're actually teaching when you happen to do that? Especially when *both* false messengers, *and* true messengers were foretold.

To claim that only wolves would come would errantly encourage Christians to shoot *any* messenger that says "Baa..."

Deuteronomy 18:22

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

This is where Jehovah's witness fail the test; maybe we could agree on that.

Here's some of Joseph Smith's predictions:

1) President Smith then stated that the meeting had been called, because God had commanded it; and it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit. . . . it was the will of God that they should be ordained to the ministry and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh - even fifty six years should wind up the scene. (History of the Church, Vol. 2, page 182). 

God hasn't come back yet, and its been 56 years.

2) I prophecy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunder and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished (History of the Church, Vol. 5, page 394).

None of the wrongs were redressed

3) While discussing the petition to Congress, I prophesied, by virtue of the holy Priesthood vested in me, and in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that, if Congress will not hear our petition and grant us protection, they shall be broken up as a government, and God shall damn them, and there shall be nothing left of them - not even a grease spot. (Millennial Star, Vol. 22, p. 455. See also History of the Church (HC), vol. 6, p. 116

This didn't happen.

4) D&C 111:1-5

1. I, the Lord your God, am not displeased with your coming this journey, notwithstanding your follies.

2. I have much treasure in this city for you, for the benefit of Zion, and many people in this city, whom I will gather out in due time for the benefit of Zion, through your instrumentality.

3. Therefore, it is expedient that you should form acquaintance with men in this city, as you shall be led, and as it shall be given you.

4. And it shall come to pass in due time that I will give this city into your hands, that you shall have power over it, insomuch that they shall not discover your secret parts; and its wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours.

5. Concern not yourselves about your debts, for I will give you power to pay them.
 

The treasure wasn't found. The Mormons never took Salem.

5) And now I am prepared to say by the authority of Jesus Christ, that not many years shall pass away before the United States shall present such a scene of bloodshed as has not a parallel in the history of our nation; pestilence, hail, famine, and earthquake will sweep the wicked of this generation from off the face of the land, to open and prepare the way for the return of the lost tribes of Israel from the north country. The people of the Lord, those who have complied with the requirements of the new covenant, have already commenced gathering together to Zion, which is in the state of Missouri; therefore I declare unto you the warning which the Lord has commanded to declare unto this generation, remembering that the eyes of my Maker are upon me, and that to him I am accountable for every word I say, wishing nothing worse to my fellow-men than their eternal salvation; therefore, "Fear God, and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come." Repent ye, repent ye, and embrace the everlasting covenant and flee to Zion, before the overflowing scourge overtake you, for there are those now living upon the earth whose eyes shall not be closed in death until they see all these things, which I have spoken, fulfilled (History of the Church, Vol. 1, pp. 315-316).

This didn't happened

6) D&C 84:1-5

 

1. A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high.

2. Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.

3. Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.

4. Verily, this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.

5. For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.

This didn't happen either.

Do you see a pattern?

Deuteronomy 13:5

 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

I am not saying that we should stone false prophets, but Mosaic law shows what God thinks of false prophets, and He's not  a fan.

[cdowis]

25 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

Deuteronomy 18:22

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

This is where Jehovah's witness fail the test; maybe we could agree on that.

Here's some of Joseph Smith's predictions:

Let's use this same test on the prophets in the Bible,  shall we?

Each of these Biblical prophets made a prophecy that failed, that did not come true.  
1. Jonah 
prophecy -- Jjonah 3 [4] And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
result -- Jonah gave an UNCONDITIONAL prophecy, and it failed.

2. Isaiah
prophecy -- Isa 38 [1] In those days was Hezekiah sick unto death. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came unto him, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not live.
result -- Isaiah gave an UNCONDITIONAL prophecy, and it failed.  Hezekiah did not die for another fifteen years

3.Nathan --
propnecy -- 2 Sam 7 [2] That the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.
[3] And Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart; for the LORD is with thee. 
result -- Nathan gave an UNCONDITIONAL prophecy, and it failed.  David did not build the temple, but his son built it.

See also Matt 24:2, but the Wailing Wall is still standing, which was part of the temple.  

Quote

I am not saying that we should stone false prophets, but Mosaic law shows what God thinks of false prophets, and He's not  a fan

OK, you claim to know who is going to heaven, who is going to hell and what is going to happen to these "false" (as you call them)  Bible prophets.

But that is something between you and your Creator.  I'm not interested in your excuses.

Edited October 5, 2016 by cdowis

[cdowis]

32 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

This is where Jehovah's witness fail the test; maybe we could agree on that.

 

Look, Larry, before you start the routine of blathering away with the old, tired antiMorrmon arguments,  let me suggest that we save ourselves some time with your reviewing this this thread.  Let us know if you have something new to say, utterwise it is just a matter of cut and paste.

http://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/57532-youtube-apologetics/

Edited October 5, 2016 by cdowis

[JLHPROF]

32 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

Deuteronomy 18:22

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Here's some of Joseph Smith's predictions:

I am not saying that we should stone false prophets, but Mosaic law shows what God thinks of false prophets, and He's not  a fan.

Yeah, God can't be happy about these either:

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
(Sounds a lot like #5 from Joseph you listed)

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
(Darn wailing wall...someone knock it down already!)

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
(Friday night, Saturday, Sunday morning - nope).

 

Or maybe, just maybe, our interpretation of these prophecies might need a little revisiting and context to understand their fulfillment.
Just like Joseph Smith's prophecies you listed.

Edited October 5, 2016 by JLHPROF

[Larry Cotrell]

17 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Look, Larry, before you start the routine of blathering away with the old, tired antiMorrmon arguments,  let me suggest that we save ourselves some time with your reviewing this this thread.  Let us know if you have something new to say, utterwise it is just a matter of cut and paste.

http://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/57532-youtube-apologetics/

Oh, you're that @cdowis. We've probably run into each other on Mormon hub before. I'll take your advice and drop the question, but these are good questions that demand an answer. I get tired of people calling me anti-Mormon instead of answering my questions. (And thank you to those of you who do answer)

[Larry Cotrell]

25 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Look, Larry, before you start the routine of blathering away with the old, tired antiMorrmon arguments,  let me suggest that we save ourselves some time with your reviewing this this thread.  Let us know if you have something new to say, utterwise it is just a matter of cut and paste.

http://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/57532-youtube-apologetics/

And I have read (and posted on) that thread.

[notHagoth7]

1 hour ago, Larry Cotrell said:

Deuteronomy 18:22

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Did Moses ever speak presumptuously?

(He did.) ...We can discuss variant translations of that passage later, if there is genuine interest.

However, did Moses' presumption mean God's word through him in *other* utterances were errant and should be ignored?

 

I suggest that your approach to this passage is informed by your opinions - rather than the other way around.

(The passage doesn't necessarily read what you happen to read into it. Although your approach *is* the most common way to read that passage. - but I'm not one who is fond of broad roads, and generally opt for a road less traveled.) 

Edited October 5, 2016 by notHagoth7

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

The reference to false prophets is exactly why I posted a link to a detailed essay called Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets which gathers 28 distinct tests for prophets from the Bible, gathers many passages showing what a seeker ought to do to see truth, many passages showing arguments made by Biblical peoples to reject true prophets, among other things.   I did find it interesting that the two or three best known of the tests also turn out to the ones most abused in practice.

Just in case it was overlooked.  Again.

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

More like always!

The clowns in the woods are attacking, but at least they are coming out of the woodwork.