Jason

Really? Interesting. Where? Can you offer a better reason to include non-English words into an English translation to be read by the masses, as opposed to the educated elite?

References please?

First of all, I cannot believe I'm being called out on a post that's over two years old! Wrong. The translation was to be done in a language that everyone understood. Do you think that everyone knew French in early 19th century America? I guess we'll have to wait and see. Tell me something I don't already know. It is my understanding that Latin was taught in public school until the 1950's or later. Of course, French and German were pretty common as well. But does it make sense to include a Latin, French or German word into an ENGLISH text? I think you've already answered that in the negative. The word "adieu" does not make the BoM fradulent. But it doesn't do much for Smiths translating abilities, as I pointed out two years ago that "god be with you" or "go with god" would have been a perfect translation for this. I think he did it to make it seem more like the rest of Scripture. Again, I don't know how we can tell for sure, other than reviewing public news papers of the area and looking for the word in print. Yeah, but notice Smith used the word "Christian" not the French "Chrétien". B)

What kind of dance classes Jason? Not ballet, but everything else?

I don't mind being a heretic. Frankly, everyone in my church is an admitted heretic, and we're quite proud of that fact. Heretic. B) LOL! I know, I know. A while back, my friend "selek" on another board pointed out to me that one of my beliefs is one of the "top heresies" listed by Joseph F. Smith. It takes me a lot to maintain a belief in G-d. Sometimes that means that I have to be viewed as a heretic by some… or most. At least living in Las Vegas has prepared me for my eventual stay in hell.

I don't have one. I got my info from an Orthodox Priest. I'll look around though. I liked this site: http://www.pallasweb.com/ikons/ikon-history.html

Add to that the understanding of the Eastern Orthodox Icon, as a window into heaven, and it grows even more IMO.

Thanks rosie. Too bad it doesn't count. Maybe you could vote on bunnzy's poll anyway? (Just don't tell her you're in Florida!)

Well technically speaking, Catholics don't pray to Mary, but actually ask her to pray for them. Now some Catholics don't understand this and do pray to Mary, but that's specifically against the Roman Catechism. It's a common misunderstanding among Latter-day Saints that Catholics and other Apostolic Churches pray to the Saints. This is due more to incorrect Evangelical teaching than anything. We venerate the Saints, but we don't worship the Saints. Two very different things. One would implicate us in idolotry, the other is no different than having respect and love for a deceased leader, and asking that they pray for us in heaven. (I recall someone saying that Joseph Smith does more for the Mormons since his death, than he could do alive?)

I think it's a buzz phrase designed by Zionists to con us into believing we're all basically the same in belief. Keeps us proping up the State of Israel with our billions of dollars per annum in welfare support, without much complaint from the tax payers. I'm anti-Zionist. I think we should dismantle the state of Israel, and return governmental control to Palestinians (with appropriate safe-guards for the Jews now living there). Sure. I'm not talking about actual praxis in today's world. I'm talking about the words on the pages.

I'd be a Canaanite before I'd be a Jew. I prefer to be more tolerant of the beliefs of others. To me, Judaism and Christianity are as far opposed as Buddhism and Hinduism. It irritates me to no end that Evangelical Christians have succeeded in incorporating the phrase "Judeo-Christian" into our vocabulary. For me, the Message of the Christ is totally incompatible with Judaism.

Well gee...no. But all voters from Florida don't count anyway....look at the last two elections as evidence!

Heretic. B)

You're crazy. Then again, I personally loath the Old Testament minus the Psalms and Proverbs. But I don't care much for St Paul's works either. I like the Gospels. :) At first, I laughed at this and was ready to flippantly respond: "When was Paul born?" But, then I read your clarification: I don't hold ecclesiastical epistles written by a man that never personally knew Christ in the same regard as the Torah. Call me crazy. Then again, I don't hold the Torah to be infallible either (after all of the redactors, scribes and the revisions brought about by the Deuteronomists, there's a considerable amount of politics and mythology mixed in with the divine).

So Joseph Smith was a medium, viewing the Akashic record and did the best he could?

Only two people on this board have stated that they dislike me without question. That leaves the other 19000+ members as either no-vote, or yes-vote. And that's my story.

Good info there. Never knew the Father's said Paul was married. But why would you presume that Genesis was god's word, and not Paul's? In other words, what gives you the confidence that Genesis is more inspired than Paul?

CFR Council on Foreign Relations?

I never said: "People don't like me." I said people were attacking my character rather than my questions last weekend. Most people on this board like me.

Ok, so we need to identify the two chapters of Moses which are a "recreation" of Enoch's "lost" book, and then compare those to existant Enochian literature. One problem I see here is that no single text fits here. Likely the Enochian literature we have was not authored by the "historical" Enoch. So what we have is a restoration of an apocryphal author. Unless the mystery author was named Enoch, or a reincarnation of Enoch? A much better discussion worthy of it's own thread IMO. (I rather enjoy the "cosmic Christ" of St. Paul, who seemingly never wrote of a "living" Christ.

Option A: Stay with him. Option B: Leave him. If you have kids, go with option a and get a lover. If you don't have kids, go with option b and find a new husband.

Oldest started 2nd grade. Middle started Kindergarden. Youngest started pre-school. Everyone is thrilled so far. They all started dance classes for the first time as well. Big hit all around.

No problem. What I think bothers me is that Enoch dates from about the same period as the dead sea scrolls (give or take a few decades), and yet the similarities between them and the OT are nearly identical, whereas Enoch and Moses are vastly different. Do you see where I'm going here?

I've had 1st Enoch for a long time. What I'm saying is that I'm not impressed by the parallels. There are a few which do interest me, as I said, but I see more coincidence than divine inspiration. Are these "parallels" from 1,2 or 3rd Enoch?

I think some of those are very interesting. But as you noted, they are not proof. Nor do they match up enough to grant them an exact parallel. If Moses was a recreation of Enoch, then I would expect better than this.