more mormon heresy

[Sargon]

That's not exactly accurate. They believe that those who Help Jesus overcome his brother Lucifer were made angels or white men. Those who were on the side of Lucifer were made demons. Those who were neutral were sent to earth and given black skin.

Actually, we dont believe in that either. Those who followed Satan were never allowed to obtain their own physical bodies on earth, and never will be. After that, we have no official stance that I am aware of as to any inferior pre-existant status of black people. There are many hypothesis, and many conclusions drawn, but to represent the LDS church as teaching that the blacks were neutral is to misrepresent the LDS church. The very fact that they are on this earth means that they chose to follow Christ in the pre-existance according to official LDS doctrine.

Sargon

[Gman]

Ok well then please explain 2 Nephi 5:21...

5:21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

or 1 Nephi 12:23
12:23 And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.

Also, I'm very familiar with Mormon teaching. I was raised in Idaho..

[puritan lad]

I have tons of questions about the Book of Mormon, like

1.) Where did all of those Greek words come from (Alpha, Omega, Christ, Timothy, etc.?

2.) Why does the Book of Mormon plagiarize William Shakespeare's Hamlet (among other writings)?

3.) Why does the Book of Mormon mention animals in early America that did not exist (details can be given if necessary)? Why does is mention silk in early America?

4.) Why does the Book of Mormon have the exact same translation and grammatical errors as the 1611 King James Bible (ie, Seraphims)?

5.) Whatever happened to those people on the moon dressed like Quakers who lived to be 1,000 years old?

That's just a good start...

[Sargon]

answers coming, I dont have time today.

Sargon

[Sargon]

In the mean time have you ever tried to find the mormon response to those questions on the internet? Being from Idaho you should be familiar with FARMs and FAIR, among others.

Sargon

[Gman]

In the mean time have you ever tried to find the mormon response to those questions on the internet? Being from Idaho you should be familiar with FARMs and FAIR, among others.

Sargon

Actually I'm not familiar with FARMs and FAIR. I only know the basics of Mormonism. I was raised and went to public schools with Mormons for about 1/4 of my life. They were actually pretty nice to me but didn't really get to close to me because of my protestant background..

As for 2 Nephi 5:21, when I brought this up to 3 elders, they didn't deny what it said.. They told me it was written this way because that is how most people perceived blacks back then.. They said that they didn't look at blacks this way anymore.. However, when I asked why it was still in the Book of Mormon they didn't have a response for me. Pretty much after that they walked away from me...

It seems pretty strange to me that such a verse or verses would be found in a holy book.. You would never find a verse like that in the Bible against other races.. The Scriptures teach plainly that God hath made of one blood all nations of men.

Acts 17:26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.

Also, I know many Mormons who left because of all the hypocrisy. Again they say that they want to be an favorable to all races but when you look at the facts, it sure doesn't appear that way... In fact, that is why you will find most of the Mormon missions in technically white areas of the world like Europe or Russia. Of course there are missions in Hawaii, but who wouldn't want to be a missionary there..? Just get the book called "Mormon Chronicles" by ex-Mormon missionary Tom Hall. He will explain it to you. Or if you would like me to scan a portion of it into the thread. It's up to you..

Take care,

G -

[Lizard Man]

Ugh. My mom's a Mormon convert.

[Gman]

I'm sorry to hear that Lizard.. The problem is that so many people can be blinded by all these cute commercials that they show on TV. They make it so appealing and such a FUN and cool thing to do and believe in...

I will pray for your mother,

G -

[Michelle]

I'm sorry to hear that Lizard.. The problem is that so many people can be blinded by all these cute commercials that they show on TV. They make it so appealing and such a FUN and cool thing to do and believe in...

I will pray for your mother,

G -

Gman, I am not sure about the commercials that you refer to however in Australia the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday(?) Saints have commercials that seem similar. Is the above I have mentioned also known as the Mormons? It is true that sometimes they can blind many people.

[Sargon]

One important thing to remember is that a very small percentage of mormon missionaries are trained in apologetics, though most seem to think they are well-enough self-taught. Having once been a missionary myself, I know this from firsthand experience. Having no scholarly works at their disposal while serving as a missionary, they have no access to the vasts amount of information out there. And frankly, a very small percentage of them would have been interested or even aware of many of the issues that are criticized by anti-mormons before their missions. Actually, no missionary is formally trained in apologetics, it is nowhere taught in any curriculum in the church, especially not in the Missionary Training Centers around the world.

Rather than dive into the massive amounts of information available on the topic of race in the Book of Mormon, I will leave you with a link to an article by an apologist named John A. Tvetdnes. He knows alot more than I do and will surely demonstrate to you that racism is not taught in the Book of Mormon. It is a short though intense article, please enjoy.

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences ... ormon.html


Sargon

[Sargon]

Being human and not having a firm grasp or a perfect knowledge of the many specialized fields in mormon apologetics, I must confess to having to choose my battles. For those topics I dont feel comfortable addressing(because of a lack of knowledge on my part, or because someone else can do a better job) I will do my best to provide the best resources I can find and post them.
However I am excited to address the questions raised by Puritan Lad. I have found in my experience that when confronted with a list of accusations in an internet forum such as this one, it is best to tackle them one at a time. Trying to cover every question at once will spread me thin and I might leave out a piece of important information. Also, I like to make sure that those I am addressing have a fair chance to reply before we change subjects.
Therefore the first question asked was:

1.) Where did all of those Greek words come from (Alpha, Omega, Christ, Timothy, etc.?

The foundation of this argument is that the Book of Mormon claims to be translated into English from a language called "Reformed Egyptian", so how can greek words appear in it?
An excellent question and one that I am more than eager to respond to. The short answer is, as any translator should do Joseph Smith was faced with the challenge of translating an unknown language into words that people would understand. The people in his time, as in ours, were familiar with words like "Alpha and Omega", "Christian" and "Christ", and so he thought it wise to use languange that would properly convey the message being sent.
Now for the long answer. In translating the KJV of the bible, 54 scholars spent years working on it. They labored tirelessly comparing and checking each others work trying to come to a concensus about the best way to translate difficult passages. Just like Joseph Smith did, they used words that the people of their day would understand, regardless of what lannguage it was. For example we can find french being used in:

Exd 26:6 And thou shalt make fifty taches of gold, and couple the curtains together with the taches: and it shall be one tabernacle.

Exd 26:11 And thou shalt make fifty taches of brass, and put the taches into the loops, and couple the tent together, that it may be one

and

Exd 30:18 Thou shalt also make a laver [of] brass, and his foot [also of] brass, to wash [withal]: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein.

Exd 30:28 And the altar of burnt offering with all his vessels, and the laver and his foot.

also

Jer 10:22 Behold, the noise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north country, to make the cities of Judah desolate, [and] a den of dragons.

Nah 3:19 [There is] no healing of thy bruise; thy wound is grievous: all that hear the bruit of thee shall clap the hands over thee: for upon whom hath not thy wickedness passed continually?

We all know that french was not the language of the hebrews, yet we see it in the bible. The people in the 1600's would have known those words and made the connection. Comparing with modern translations, those words arent used because people wont know what they mean.
Does this mean the bible is false? Of course not!!
The Book of Mormon also has french. At the end of the Book of Jacob in the BoM we bids his readers adieu. Adieu carries a different connotation than goodbye, as it means "I commend you to God". Interestingly, there is a word in Hebrew that that means virtually the same thing, Lehitra'ot.
Also, the NT uses the word "compass" in Acts 28:13, and the word "Easter" in Acts 12:4. The compass was invented by the Chinese around 1000 AD. Easter certainly was not the word originally written, as most would agree. Most modern translations render it "Passover".
Do these facts shake anyones faith in the bible? Of course not. They are mere questions of translation. The message is the same, but put in words that the people will understand. The Nephites and Lamanites in the Boof of Mormon probably didnt literally say "Alpha and Omega" or "Christ", but had their own words. The ancient Hebrews probably didnt say "laver", "bruit", or "tache" either. I think you get my point.

I am still researching Greek names like Timothy and Lachoneus in the Book of Mormon. Please bear with me as I sort through the complicated amounts of information to present an easy to understand explanation.

[Jac3510]

Reformed Egyptian??? As in, the same language Smith copied from the supposed gold plates that we have in the Anthon Caractors? Even though linguist Charles Anthon said that . . . "the letters were definitely not "reformed Egyptian", and could in fact be identified as Greek, Hebrew, and Latin letters flipped around or turned on their sides."

It's a "language" that has absolutely NO archaeological attestation to it whatsoever, and is contradicted by what we know to be true from the era it was supposedly written in, and the only supposed example we have is actually Greek, Hebrew, and Latin characters turned in different directions.

Ok, then :p

[Sargon]

In 1828 there was very little understanding of egyptian at all in the world. Prof. Anthon gave contradictory statements about the characters, first stating that they were egyptian, then that they were not. Actually, his remarks were probably not more than opinion based on the scarce egyptian knowledge of his day.

http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=17

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table= ... V3LnBocA==

Sargon

[puritan lad]

1.) Where did all of those Greek words come from (Alpha, Omega, Christ, Timothy, etc.?

The foundation of this argument is that the Book of Mormon claims to be translated into English from a language called "Reformed Egyptian", so how can greek words appear in it?
An excellent question and one that I am more than eager to respond to. The short answer is, as any translator should do Joseph Smith was faced with the challenge of translating an unknown language into words that people would understand. The people in his time, as in ours, were familiar with words like "Alpha and Omega", "Christian" and "Christ", and so he thought it wise to use languange that would properly convey the message being sent.
Now for the long answer. In translating the KJV of the bible, 54 scholars spent years working on it. They labored tirelessly comparing and checking each others work trying to come to a concensus about the best way to translate difficult passages. Just like Joseph Smith did, they used words that the people of their day would understand, regardless of what lannguage it was. For example we can find french being used in:

Exd 26:6 And thou shalt make fifty taches of gold, and couple the curtains together with the taches: and it shall be one tabernacle.

Sargon,

One of the problems here is that the plagiarism goes beyond a mere familiarity with the language. This can be shown by 2 Nephi 16, which is an exactly copy of the older KJV of Isaiah 6. In verse 2, the original of both books used the word "seraphims". You may write this off as a "using words that the people of their day would understand". The problem here is that this rendering is incorrect. There is no such word as "seraphims". The correct plural form is "seraphim", for the singular word "seraph". The modern version of both books makes the correction. However, the plagiarism of 2 Nephi from Isaiah 6 (KJV) is quite obvious. (It also poses problems for the KJV Only crowd as well, but that is another debate.)

Also, the fact that Joseph Smith didn't speak a word of Egyptian doesn't help matters, particular in translating "Reformed Egyptian" to English via Greek and Hebrew.

I am still researching Greek names like Timothy and Lachoneus in the Book of Mormon. Please bear with me as I sort through the complicated amounts of information to present an easy to understand explanation.

Looking forward to it. I hold that the Book of Mormon is solely the invention of a man named Joseph Smith, who knew very little about the Bible, and even less about ancient America.

[Jac3510]

Have you looked at the history of Anthon's supposed endorsement of the transcript?

Besides this, Anthon was not an Egyptologist (as already noted, he was a linguist). However:

• According to Mormon historians, "a fragment of the transcript of the Book of Mormon characters" that was submitted to Professor Anthon is still in existence (see A Comprehensive History of the Church, vol. 1, p.100). Egyptologists who have examined the Anthon Transcript are unable to make any kind of translation. Klaus Baer, of the University of Chicago, thinks the characters are nothing but "doodlings." Mormon Egyptologist Edward Ashment could not identify the script (see Sunstone, May-June 1980, p.30). (Source)

I would say 1980 is a little more recent than 1840. Tell you what: you show me a single Egyptologist is thinks the scripts provided by Smith are anything related to Egyptian, reformed or otherwise.

Just to continue the point, though, here's an extended quote from the same site:

• Whether Joseph Smith copied the characters or made them up, the Anthon Transcript provides no evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon because no one is able to read it. The Mormon scholar Sidney B. Sperry frankly stated that "no one, the prophet Joseph Smith excepted, has yet translated the Anthon Transcript. If modern students of Egyptians can't do it—at least they haven't—it is too much to believe that Professor Anthon could" (The Problems of the Book of Mormon, p.60).
  
  Actually, the Anthon Transcript provides a great deal of evidence against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. M. T. Lamb stated:
  
  • The point we here wish to make is this: throughout North America, according to the Book of Mormon, this reformed Egyptian was the universal language of the people fifteen hundred years ago, when the Book of Mormon was compiled.
    
    Now fortunately or unfortunately Joseph Smith has preserved for us and for the inspection of the world, a specimen of the characters found upon the plates from which he claims to have translated the Book of Mormon. He transcribed a few of the characters from the plates as specimens....
    
    Well, now, unfortunately for the claims of the Book of Mormon, we are able to learn precisely what kind of characters were used in Central America by its ancient inhabitants. They have been preserved in imperishable marble. Engraven upon stone in such a way as to retain to the end of time a silent though solemn rebuke to the false and foolish pretensions of the author of this book.
    
    In the ruins of the two oldest cities in Central America, Copan and Palenque, are found in abundance the strange hieroglyphics, the written language of the people who once inhabited those old cities. Thousands of these mysterious characters are scattered about, engraven over ruined doorways and arches, upon the sides and backs of hideous-looking idols carved in stone, upon marble slabs, on the sides of immense pillars, here and there through the ruins of magnificent palaces and monster heathen temples....
    
    These same hieroglyphics have been preserved in other form—for the ancient Mayas had books.... An examination of the three that are now known to be preserved, shows the same characters that are found upon the stone tablets, idols, etc., .... and represent the actual written language of the ancient Mayas—a people who are known to have occupied Central America, and been the sole occupants of a portion of that country at the very time, and covering the whole period, when, according to the Book of Mormon, the Nephites lived and flourished there.... A woeful fatality, is it not? that there should not be even one of Mr. Smith's characters that bears a family likeness, or the least particle of resemblance to the characters actually used by the ancient inhabitants of Central America! ... we should find, in thousands of places, these reformed Egyptian characters engraved upon marble blocks and granite pillars.... But need we say that just the contrary of all this is found to be true.... It would therefore be sheer nonsense to imagine that the assertions of the Book of Mormon may after all have been true, but that through the lapse of time all traces of such a written language may have disappeared. Stone and marble, and gold and silver, and copper and brass are not liable to disappear in the brief period of 1500 years (The Golden Bible, pp.259-72).
  In 1959 the Mormon archaeologist Ross T. Christensen frankly admitted that "'reformed' Egyptian" is a "form of writing which we have not yet identified in the archaeological material available to us" (Book of Mormon Institute, December 5, 1959, BYU, 1964 ed., p.10).
  
  John A. Wilson, who was professor of Egyptology at the University of Chicago, summarized the situation in a letter to Marvin Cowan: "From time to time there are allegations that picture writing has been found in America.... In no case has a professional Egyptologist been able to recognize these characters as Egyptian hieroglyphs. From our standpoint there is no such language as 'reformed Egyptian'" (Letter from John A. Wilson dated March 16, 1966).
  
  Richard A. Parker, department of Egyptology at Brown University, added his corroboration that, "No Egyptian writing has been found in this hemisphere to my knowledge" (Letter to Marvin Cowan, dated March 22, 1966). In the same letter Richard A. Parker stated: "I do not know of any language such as Reformed Egyptian."
  
  In Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? (pp.108-16), we show that there have been a number of discoveries in the New World which have been used to try to support the Book of Mormon. We demonstrate, however, that these finds do not support the claims of the Book of Mormon and a number of them have turned out to be forgeries.

God bless