Recent Youtube Apologetics

[cdowis]

>>did not translate from the plates

He could not translate unless he was in possession of the plates.
But the plates did not have to be physically present in the hat -- the seer stone could translate the plates remotely,.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>>The Bible says......

2 Peter 1 [20] Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God [prophets] spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost [revelation].

The Lord has called in our day, not scribes and Pharasees with their lexicons, but living prophets with revelation to interpret the scriptures. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MMfh-0XzqQ&t=2s

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just curious, how do you explain his being able to dictate for hours at a sitting, with his face in a hat -- no lamp, no table, unable to turn pages, no manuscript to read from. Just read the Book of Mormon and see how that "maps to reality" to be able to dictate such a book.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Reformed Egyptian

In the July/August 2018 edition of "Biblical Archaeology Review" on page 33, is an article "Egyptian Papyrus Sheds New Light on Jewish History." The author is Karel van der Toorn. The article is about a papyrus roll discovered in the late 19th century at Luxor (ancient Thebes). It took more than 120 years to decipher the text. It was discovered that Egyptian Demotic script had been used to write Aramaic text! The translation turned out to be three Israelite psalms written about 400BC. This is an example of "Reformed Egyptian" used by Israelites and discovered by non-Mormons!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Joseph Smith... blah blah blah

 

Why don't you expose other prophets ==

MOSES -- used a mystical staff that magicians also used which could transform into a serpent.

Killed an Egyptian hid his body, and fled out of Egypt to escape arrest.

 

PAUL == arrested and threw into prison men, women and children for simply being Christian.

Gave approval and consent for the stoning of Stephen

An angel of light appeared to him on the road to Damascus. His account was written several decades after the event, and the two accounts contradict each other.

He was arrested for being a disorderly person and causing a riot.

 

PETER == took a sword and almost killed a servant, told a lie and denied knowing Christ multiple times.

 

NATHAN == gave false prophecy about David building a temple.

 

Edited November 25, 2018 by cdowis

[cdowis]

Many of the denominations are followers of Paul who is the catalyst of those Christians sects today. Paul taught that the mouth could save us (Rom 10:10), which was contrary to what Christ taught.  James tried to correct him -- faith without works is dead, and dead faith faith cannot save anyone , the demons confess Christ and tremble.

They continue to teach Paul's other gospel in their churches today rather than what Christ taught -- e.g. baptism (a work) is necessary for salvation (Mark 16:16).

Peter warned us about following the teachings of Paul (2 Peter 3:15-16) but they heed not his warning.

Edited November 25, 2018 by cdowis

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, cdowis said:

>>did not translate from the plates

He could not translate unless he was in possession of the plates.
But the plates did not have to be physically present in the hat -- the seer stone could translate the plates remotely,.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>>The Bible says......

2 Peter 1 [20] Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God [prophets] spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost [revelation].

The Lord has called in our day, not scribes and Pharasees with their lexicons, but living prophets with revelation to interpret the scriptures. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MMfh-0XzqQ&t=2s

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just curious, how do you explain his being able to dictate for hours at a sitting, with his face in a hat -- no lamp, no table, unable to turn pages, no manuscript to read from. Just read the Book of Mormon and see how that "maps to reality" to be able to dictate such a book.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Reformed Egyptian

In the July/August 2018 edition of "Biblical Archaeology Review" on page 33, is an article "Egyptian Papyrus Sheds New Light on Jewish History." The author is Karel van der Toorn. The article is about a papyrus roll discovered in the late 19th century at Luxor (ancient Thebes). It took more than 120 years to decipher the text. It was discovered that Egyptian Demotic script had been used to write Aramaic text! The translation turned out to be three Israelite psalms written about 400BC. This is an example of "Reformed Egyptian" used by Israelites and discovered by non-Mormons!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Joseph Smith... blah blah blah

 

Why don't you expose other prophets ==

MOSES -- used a mystical staff that magicians also used which could transform into a serpent.

Killed an Egyptian hid his body, and fled out of Egypt to escape arrest.

 

PAUL == arrested and threw into prison men, women and children for simply being Christian.

Gave approval and consent for the stoning of Stephen

An angel of light appeared to him on the road to Damascus. His account was written several decades after the event, and the two accounts contradict each other.

He was arrested for being a disorderly person and causing a riot.

 

PETER == took a sword and almost killed a servant, told a lie and denied knowing Christ multiple times.

 

NATHAN == gave false prophecy about David building a temple.

 

Well, just as I don't believe in these prophets, I don't believe in any prophet that doesn't align with my image of God. The Bible is words of men, and men aren't God. They are men who think it's to be a certain way who think they've been inspired by God. Men who made up things in order to make people conform. Thank goodness God gave us our own spirit, intuitions, guides, and moral compasses. And want us to have the personal relationship with him, not men.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Tacenda

[Glenn101]

19 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I don't believe in any prophet that doesn't align with my image of God.

Isn't this creating God in your own image? How do you know that you have the correct image of God?

Glenn

[Tacenda]

56 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Isn't this creating God in your own image? How do you know that you have the correct image of God?

Glenn

How do they, how do you? I think it's personal for everyone right?

[longview]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

. . . The Bible is words of men, and men aren't God. They are men who think it's to be a certain way who think they've been inspired by God. Men who made up things in order to make people conform . . .

So you don't think God wants people to have scriptures which is the word of God?  So you don't think God wants people to exercise faith, that they must only see by the sight of their eyes?  You demand that people be able to SEE God so that they will not be forced to second-guess their God?  You deny that there was a pre-existence spirit world?  That the only purpose for this earth is to bring people into existence EX NIHILO?  Complete with body and spirit from square zero?  Do you think what happened in the Garden of Eden was an UTTER disaster, that the FALL should NOT have happened?   Your ingratitude is breath-taking!

[cdowis]

>>new religious argument Here goes, courtesy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints ==>>

Matter is eternal. God used existing matter in the creation process, not ex nihlo.

Natural law is also eternal, and God is subject to those laws.
For example, God used the laws of evolution, gravity, quantum physics in the creation process. Chicken and egg. They have always existed in the universe. There was no "first" egg or chicken. (a modified panspermia

[cdowis]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

Isn't this creating God in your own image? How do you know that you have the correct image of God?

Glenn

Gen.5

[1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
[2] Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
[3] And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

[cdowis]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Well, just as I don't believe in these prophets, 

Then  you would agree that  I am obviously not speaking to you.

Edited November 25, 2018 by cdowis

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Then  you would agree that  I am not speaking to you.

😳 

 

23 minutes ago, longview said:

So you don't think God wants people to have scriptures which is the word of God?  So you don't think God wants people to exercise faith, that they must only see by the sight of their eyes?  You demand that people be able to SEE God so that they will not be forced to second-guess their God?  You deny that there was a pre-existence spirit world?  That the only purpose for this earth is to bring people into existence EX NIHILO?  Complete with body and spirit from square zero?  Do you think what happened in the Garden of Eden was an UTTER disaster, that the FALL should NOT have happened?   Your ingratitude is breath-taking!

My ingratitude? I agree, I'm not grateful for men putting words in God's mouth. How do you know that they speak the truth? I have major problems with things written through the ages that discriminate women, people of color, and many more. Or things such as killings attributed to God. I hope there are some God inspired words in the Bible, but there are many that aren't if they all came from God, it would be difficult to want to have anything to do with that God. And God warned us against false prophets. If what they say is false and doesn't happen etc. We are to turn from these prophets or men. I believe Jesus didn't like what he saw and spoke out. I also believe that Joseph did the same. But the difference is Jesus performed miracles. But some don't believe Jesus existed, so I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder. I sure hope I haven't offended.

[Jeanne]

40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

😳

 

My ingratitude? I agree, I'm not grateful for men putting words in God's mouth. How do you know that they speak the truth? I have major problems with things written through the ages that discriminate women, people of color, and many more. Or things such as killings attributed to God. I hope there are some God inspired words in the Bible, but there are many that aren't if they all came from God, it would be difficult to want to have anything to do with that God. And God warned us against false prophets. If what they say is false and doesn't happen etc. We are to turn from these prophets or men. I believe Jesus didn't like what he saw and spoke out. I also believe that Joseph did the same. But the difference is Jesus performed miracles. But some don't believe Jesus existed, so I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder. I sure hope I haven't offended.

I want to rep this so bad.  You speak from your heart Tacenda..your truth is a part of you.  As a child and daughter of God...you have a right to that truth.

[Glenn101]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

How do they, how do you? I think it's personal for everyone right?

How do the prophets know? By revelation as to doctrines, and often by an actual visitation (such as that of Joseph Smith), as to the literal, physical image but the literal image is not that of which you speak, I am assuming. How do I know? Well, first of all, I do not have a complete picture of God as of yet. My understanding is imperfect, to say the least. It is based upon the scriptures that I have read as well as a really profound spiritual experience confirming Jesus the Christ as our Savior and Joseph Smith as a prophet of God.

If God could be re-imaged according to every person's personal beliefs, we would have a very confused Christianity (we actually do have that) and a very confused God, having to change or adapt His doctrines and commandments according to the beliefs of each individual. The scriptures do say that God is not the author of confusion.

There are some things in the Bible, especially the Old Testament that trouble me a lot. But Jesus did not speak against those things, or at least is not on record as speaking against those things. So I have to adopt a wait and see attitude, knowing that at some future time all that is not clear or hidden will be revealed. Until that time I just have to continue to walk in faith.

Ultimately, whatever is the truth is what we will have to deal with. It does not matter what that truth is, or whether we like it or not, we will have to deal with whatever reality actually is, If the atheists are correct, then there is no problem for anyone. We can do whatever we like and if we get away with it here in this life, we get away with it forever. But if there is a God, then everyone will have to deal with the reality that God presents humankind with. It will not matter whether we like it or not, we will have no choice but to deal with it. We will not be able to make God conform with whatever image or beliefs that we have of Him. We will have to conform ultimately to what He presents to us. Here on this earth, during the mortal phase of our existence, we can believe whatever we wish, believe in whatever God we wish, believe whatever we wish about the God we bow down to, but in the end God will be revealed to all as He really is. However, the Holy Ghost is available to help us obtain as much of the truth as we are able to handle while still in mortality.

Glenn

[Glenn101]

2 hours ago, cdowis said:

Gen.5

[1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
[2] Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
[3] And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Thanks for your quotes. I do believe that Tacenda was not speaking of a literal image though, but more along the lines of a God of love who would not kill people by flood or have them killed by sword, or who would not discriminate against women or people of a different race or skin color, etc.

Glenn

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

Thanks for your quotes. I do believe that Tacenda was not speaking of a literal image though, but more along the lines of a God of love who would not kill people by flood or have them killed by sword, or who would not discriminate against women or people of a different race or skin color, etc.

Glenn

Spot on Glenn! 

[cdowis]

Evidences of the Book of Mormon: Complexity
https://youtu.be/B-XC05DHH2w
Evidences of the Book of Mormon: Nahom
https://youtu.be/EOPFob0cjfw
Howlers in the Book of Mormon
https://youtu.be/z1coYRS-i6M
Evidences of the Book of Mormon: Translation
https://youtu.be/4LdR7BoI6F0

[cdowis]

4 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

Thanks for your quotes. I do believe that Tacenda was not speaking of a literal image though, but more along the lines of a God of love who would not kill people by flood or have them killed by sword, or who would not discriminate against women or people of a different race or skin color, etc.

Glenn

I do not find that in the dictionary under "image".

He is changing the subject, and should open up his own thread.

Edited November 26, 2018 by cdowis

[Glenn101]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

I do not find that in the dictionary under "image".

From Dictionary.com

3. a mental representation; idea; conception.

[cdowis]

15 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

From Dictionary.com

3. a mental representation; idea; conception.

We disagree on what that means in this context.

Edited November 26, 2018 by cdowis

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, Tacenda said:

How do they, how do you? I think it's personal for everyone right?

The best test is that if your deity never disagrees with you, never gives you unpleasant instructions, and never tells you “no” they are probably not a being independent from you.

Edited November 26, 2018 by The Nehor

[Maidservant]

6 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

If God could be re-imaged according to every person's personal beliefs

It seemed to me that Tacenda was speaking of a God that she trusted to speak directly to her (from the inside and her own faculties), and that that is where she would get her information.  That sounds a lot like my God (and the location of the Holy Ghost, from the inside).

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Maidservant said:

It seemed to me that Tacenda was speaking of a God that she trusted to speak directly to her (from the inside and her own faculties), and that that is where she would get her information.  That sounds a lot like my God (and the location of the Holy Ghost, from the inside).

Thanks Maidservant! 

[RevTestament]

13 hours ago, cdowis said:

Many of the denominations are followers of Paul who is the catalyst of those Christians sects today. Paul taught that the mouth could save us (Rom 10:10), which was contrary to what Christ taught.  James tried to correct him -- faith without works is dead, and dead faith faith cannot save anyone , the demons confess Christ and tremble.

 

I think what Paul was saying that if you confess Him with your mouth that it was a sign of inward faith in him -- enough faith to brave capture and torture by Romans. In Paul's day an outward confession was a true sign of inward commitment to Christ, since those who confessed him would be despised by the Jews and the Romans alike. There was no "safe quarter" for the early Christians. Today confessing Him with your mouth seems cavalier. I think actions speak louder than words, and at that time the specific action of confessing Him was a significant sign of faith - not so much anymore - at least in the West. Maybe in an Islamic country it would be considered so, however. So what Paul was saying doesn't bother me so much anymore when understood in the context of his day. 

Quote

They continue to teach Paul's other gospel in their churches today rather than what Christ taught -- e.g. baptism (a work) is necessary for salvation (Mark 16:16).

Peter warned us about following the teachings of Paul (2 Peter 3:15-16) but they heed not his warning.

I don't think 2 Peter 3:15-6 is a warning about Paul, but a warning that what Paul was teaching was not being understood. I tend to think Peter is talking about the Book of Hebrews, which I think the churches still do not understand. So, I think Peter's warning is completely appropriate.

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I think what Paul was saying that if you confess Him with your mouth that it was a sign of inward faith in him -- enough faith to brave capture and torture by Romans. In Paul's day an outward confession was a true sign of inward commitment to Christ, since those who confessed him would be despised by the Jews and the Romans alike. There was no "safe quarter" for the early Christians. Today confessing Him with your mouth seems cavalier. I think actions speak louder than words, and at that time the specific action of confessing Him was a significant sign of faith - not so much anymore - at least in the West. Maybe in an Islamic country it would be considered so, however. So what Paul was saying doesn't bother me so much anymore when understood in the context of his day. 

I don't think 2 Peter 3:15-6 is a warning about Paul, but a warning that what Paul was teaching was not being understood. I tend to think Peter is talking about the Book of Hebrews, which I think the churches still do not understand. So, I think Peter's warning is completely appropriate.

I am using a rhetorical device called  irony to make a point to those who say that we follow Joseph Smith rather than Christ.  Basically speaking to those who say, "You follow Joseph Smith"   -->>  "Well, you follow Paul". 
I use their very  same assertions and reflect it back to them --- angel of light, convicted con man (disorderly person), another gospel,  past history of unseemly behaviour,  multiple accounts of their vision written years later,  etc 
It's all a bunch of nonsense when talking about a prophet of God, as you pointed out.

Give them the "ah ha" experience.

Edited November 26, 2018 by cdowis

[Maidservant]

9 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks Maidservant! 

❤️

[Glenn101]

11 hours ago, cdowis said:

We disagree on what that means in this context.

I was using this as the context in which Tacenda was using it. A personal conception of what her god is like.

Glenn