by rawe 139 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
...but on careful examination the BOM falls hard just like the NT.
--Depends on the criteria of your critique, my friend.
Purely as ancient literature, the NT is one of the best preserved pieces in existence. It describes a civilization, (Rome near the height of its power) that nobody doubts was real. We can see and many times even touch artifacts from this period.
If one is really feeling energetic, they can learn the source languages for themselves.
Feb. 2013 Mormon Church income annually through tithing is estimated at 7 billion dollars
The WTS is well aware of the incredible wealth and influence of the LDS.
I am convinced that one of the highest priorities of the GB is determining how to massage scripture to make tithing a requirement for JWs in "good standing".
Cofty:Mormon "scholars" are wasting their time polishing a turd.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, baseless as it is. If you had an advanced degree in ancient scripture or had committed yourself to any serious critical study, I might be more impressed. But I’ve read some of your other posts here, Cofty, and find they’re of almost no substance. You also tend to lift your points from other sources without doing any of your own groundwork. In short, if I'm polishing turds, you're throwing them. You put quotes around the word "scholars" but you know nothing about them or their backgrounds. You cite no examples of shoddy work, so you're just engaging in ad hominem attacks and essentially nothing more.
I have read large parts of the book. It's childish nonsense.
See? You did it again. Which parts of the book, exactly, are childish nonsense? And why do we have to ask? Again, based on your other posts on this website, you apparently think people are interested in your opinions without your having to back them up or document them. There are numerous non-Mormon scholars of ancient scripture who do not share your views of the Book of Mormon. Why should your views be valued over theirs?
When Joe Smith wrote down the parts he clearly plagiarized from the King James bible why did he not have the wit to update the language?
Just which parts are you referring to? Nephi and other prophets in the Western Hemisphere had the book of Isaiah and likened portions of it to themselves; however, these passages were very intelligently used and applied. They just weren’t data dumps. And if you compare the texts, they also weren’t word-for-word transliterations. Many verses contained corrections, and some passages were more closely related to the Septuagint than the KJV. Here is one article that may enlighten you. And here are some others:
Does the Book of Mormon plagiarize the King James Bible?
Discrepancies Between Translations?.
The Nephites carried with them their scriptures, which meant they not only had the same scriptures we had up to that time, but others we don’t have. And the Hebrews didn’t have the strict attribution rules we do in our culture today. Note these two quotes, one from Isaiah and one from Micah. Did one quote the other, or did they both quote another source we don’t have? Or could the Holy Spirit have dictated the same to both? So yes, whatever is happening here could also have happened in the Book of Mormon.
.
2+2=5:Were you once a JW Cold Steel? Why the fascination with this site? Are you here to convert us?
If I am here to convert you guys, I’m making a lot of headway, don’t you think?
No, for a long time I never mentioned my religion. Then someone either asked me what religion I was or I jumped in to a conversation about how Mormons were no better than Jehovah’s Witnesses and came to the defense of the LDS church, then came the cascade of insults.
When I had some JW missionaries over for a “Bible” study back in 2006, I also refused (at first) to tell them my religion. Why? (they asked). Because as soon as I tell you my religion, the discussion will change to what’s wrong with my religion and not what’s right about yours. No, they wouldn’t do that, they said. So I told them. The very next session, the two guys showed up with a guy they called an elder. Rather than sitting back in their seats like the other two, this elder sat on the very edge of the sofa. Then, bang, he began this attack on the LDS church. The other two guys just looked at him as though he were Gandhi and let him rant. We argued about premortality, the Godhead, theosis—you name it. Then he started in to “adding to the Bible” as warned about in the book of Revelation. (Apparently he didn’t know that that passage only refers to that one book and not the entire Bible, but we talked about that, too.)
I’ve always been interested in religion...all religion. Also, back a number of years ago, part of the family joined the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They immediately cut the rest of the family off and we never heard much from them after that. So that’s probably one of the biggest reasons I’m here. (If you really have to know, I’m actually here to secretly convert Cofty, but don’t tell him. I’m making a lot of progress.)
Actually, I don't mind people asking me about Mormonism, but I prefer they contact me by PM rather than start a thread that doesn't have anything to do with Jehovah's Witnesses. Oh, and BTW, I didn't start this thread. I just responded to some misunderstandings.
Marked
If you had an advanced degree in ancient scripture or had committed yourself to any serious critical study, I might be more impressed.
When it is obvious the Emperor is butt naked, there is no point in wasting time studying the woof and warp of his imaginary fabric. "Mormon scholar" is an oxymoron like "married bachelor".
You are selling a cult. Its not even a clever cult. Its embarassingly silly.
Douglas Adams nailed it in his book, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency". One of his characters was an "Electric Monk" designed to practice religion in their owner's stead.
"Unfortunately this Electric Monk had developed a fault, and had started to believe all kinds of things, more or less at random.
It was even beginning to believe things they'd have difficulty believing in Salt Lake City.”
Hi Cold Steel,
"Nephi and other prophets in the Western Hemisphere had the book of Isaiah and likened portions of it to themselves; however, these passages were very intelligently used and applied. They just weren’t data dumps. And if you compare the texts, they also weren’t word-for-word transliterations."
What the Book of Mormon contains in these sections is not an original translation from Hebrew to reformed Egyptian to English. The language "reformed Egyptian" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon (Mormon 9:32), but otherwise there is no evidence such a language ever existed. What the Book of Mormon contains in these sections is word-for-word KJV text of 1611. Obviously, the story of the Book of Mormon does not allow for KJV text of 1611 to be a source. What you say, though is key, lets compare the text, this is easy and beyond any further arguing. It is either word-for-word KJV or it is not. I've suggested 2 Nephi 22 vs KJV Isaiah 12.
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/22?lang=eng
vs
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2012&version=KJV
Here is the text...
2 Nephi 22:1 And in that day thou shalt say: O Lord, I will praise thee;
though thou wast angry with me thine anger is turned away, and
thou comfortedst me.
Isaiah 12:1 And in that day thou shalt say, O LORD, I will praise thee:
though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and
thou comfortedst me.
2 Nephi 22:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid;
for the Lord JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also has
become my salvation.
Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid:
for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is
become my salvation.
2 Nephi 22:3 Therefore, with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of
salvation.
Isaiah 12:3 Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of
salvation.
2 Nephi 22:4 And in that day shall ye say: Praise the Lord, call upon his
name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his
name is exalted.
Isaiah 12:4 And in that day shall ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon his
name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his
name is exalted.
2 Nephi 22:5 Sing unto the Lord; for he hath done excellent things; this is
known in all the earth.
Isaiah 12:5 Sing unto the LORD; for he hath done excellent things: this is
known in all the earth.
2 Nephi 22: Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion; for great is the
Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.
Isaiah 12:6 Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the
Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.
The reason why I've been pointing to 2 Nephi 22, is it shows a translation style of the KJV translators. Where the divine name YHWH appears in Hebrew, they typically did not translate it, but instead substituted the word LORD. There are a few exceptions to this general rule and this is one, where LORD JEHOVAH is the translation of the Hebrew phrase Jah-Jehovah. Nonetheless as you can see it is word-for-word and this goes on for several chapters in this section.
Cheers,
-Randy
Hi Cold Steel,
"Note these two quotes, one from Isaiah and one from Micah. Did one quote the other, or did they both quote another source we don’t have?"
Here is the text of Isaiah 2 vs Micah 4. In both cases we know from ancient manuscripts this text is legitimately old.
Micah 4:1 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.
Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
Differences: (a) last days/come to pass vs come to pass/last days, (b) house of the LORD vs LORD's house.
Micah 4:2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Isaiah 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Differences: (a) nations vs people, (b) go vs come, (c) ye, (d) law shall go forth/Zion vs Zion/go forth the law.
Micah 4:3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
Isaiah 2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
Differences: (a) many people vs the nations, (b) afar off.
So what does this tell us? These verses are not exact word-for-word. Nonetheless there are long phrases of material that indicate a common source, Micah quoting Isaiah or visa versa. Since both are known to be from the same time period it (732 BCE for Isaiah, 716 BCE for Micah, as per New World Translation, Table of Bible Books). The Bible is a collection of books, wherein actual original sources are not known. Looking at the Bible as a single book is just not correct. Thus it is entirely reasonable to believe religious thoughts of the Jews were written in several places then finally collected and redacted to become the Bible books we have today. You'll notice for example Psalms 14 is repeated as Psalms 53. While a modern Bible makes it look like Psalms is one book, in reality it is a collection of psalms that were originally on different five different scrolls. Thus it should not be surprising that an one psalm wound up in two collections.
Notice too the type of difference here, one is word order and different words. This is what one would expect, for material from a similar source, but varied slightly, then translated into English. It is for these reasons why one cannot really deny KJV text is copied into the Book of Mormon.
Cheers,
-Randy
Why would anyone here even consider becoming Mormon?
They make the Witnesses look sane.
the Mormon religion is more insane then the JW's as far as teachings go. At higher levels they even worship Ra. But the JW's deny thier rank and file the messiah and all the benifits of being a christian. Both religions need to be thrown out with the garbage and niether focus any thing much on the good news of the bible.
Band On the Run: Why would anyone here even consider becoming Mormon? They make the Witnesses look sane.
It would be nice if people would explain their reasoning. It all depends on what one knows and understands. I know quite a bit about both religions, and I can’t cobble up any reasons why I’d prefer being a Witness. As pointed out, we don’t skunk people like the Jehovah’s Witnesses do; we can attend church anywhere we wish; we’re actually encouraged to seek higher education; we don’t have any restrictions on religious materials that we read; our eschatology is far more in line with early Christianity and Judaism; we have an incredible welfare system; our scholars are recognized outside of our religion; and, if one believes in ancient Christianity, we don’t believe in anything outside of those bounds, meaning, of course, angels, revelation, apostles and prophets and gifts of the Spirit.
So in what way does all this make the Jehovah’s Witnesses look sane? Or, possibly, we have two different ideas what sanity is all about.
Rawe/Randy: The reason why I've been pointing to 2 Nephi 22, is it shows a translation style of the KJV translators. Where the divine name YHWH appears in Hebrew, they typically did not translate it, but instead substituted the word LORD.
The translation issue is one of the far most misunderstood issue of the religion. We LDS have never claimed that Joseph Smith used the same translating process as scholars and linguists. We even have no issues with the KJV of Isaiah being used in the Book of Mormon, as long as the translations are accurate. For example, people get upset when they see the word “Christ” being used in the translation of a Hebrew document produced several hundred years B.C. Mormons understand that “Messiah” would have worked equally as well, but “Christ” means the same thing in English. Or the word “adieu” in the book of Jacob. It wasn’t the word Jacob used or even a derivation of it, but readers of the Book of Mormon knew what the word meant, and it was a word that Smith knew and used in his day. So again, the final and enduring question is and remains, is the Book of Mormon translated correctly? And our reply is, it is.
Note: This article, from BBC, reports these gold
plates date back to 600 B.C., same date as the
gold plates found by Joseph Smith.
Following the directions given in the Book of Mormon, members of
the Nephi Project ended up just where Nephi did...in a great valley
("steadfast and immovable"), with a stream of water running con-
tinually through it. Subsequent research showed the encampment
dates back to 600 B.C. So did the river of water.
1 Nephi 2:9-10: And when my father saw that the waters of the river emptied into the fountain of the Red Sea, he spake unto Laman, saying: O that thou mightest be like unto this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness! And he also spake unto Lemuel: O that thou mightest be like unto this valley, firm and steadfast, and immovable in keeping the commandments of the Lord!
.
