cdowis

"It's not grammatical but structural" Very well done! When I was in the sixth grade, I had a teacher who taught us grammar AND outlining sentences. But I really began to to apply what I learned when I took Latin and Greek. They are about 20% vocabulary, and the rest was grammar and understanding sentence structure. There's nothing like having the subject at the beginning of the sentence and the verb at the end, and throwing the rest into the middle. Add a conditional clause with a aorist subjunctive*, gerunds, etc. and you had an interesting sentence to translate. It makes the "prophetic future" tense a piece of cake -- you use the past tense in speaking of a future event, which gives it a stronger sense that it will be fulfilled. What about the BOM saying that Christ will be born "AT Jerusalem". It didn't say "IN Jerusalem", but means....... Don't get me started. *e.g. it might have been possible, if.... present subjunctive, "If I be wrong, then...."

Thanks for reminding me. I consider myself as a specialist in the Book of Mormon, and Skousen is certainly required reading. I'm embarrassed to admit that I need to catch up on his research. I should start a thread on this because I have scanned his work, and find a few things where we may disagree, but, like you say, it's really awesome.

CRITIC " the book of Mormon was written in 17th century English yet produced in the 19th century." RESPONSE It only shows that It was translated from an ancient text using what was recognized as Biblical English ==>> derived from the Bible English I have read the translation of several Greek plays, poems and novels, and the translator did not use the common, colloquial language of the day, but a formal style of English. I know something about the process of translation of ancient texts, having studied Greek and Latin. You are probably aware that the translation of texts is really an art and the translator will have a particular philosophy and style -- loose vs tight, formal vs contemporary English. Sine the Book of Mormon is in the tradition of a scriptural text, it is appropriate to use "Bible language". Royal Skousen conducted a multi-year analysis of the text of the Book of Mormon and its translation. He made an unexpected discover "The original vocabulary of the Book of Mormon appears to derive from the 1500s and 1600s, not from the 1800s" Some of these archaic words and phrases are not found in the KJV. Look here for more details http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1316&index=3

Try a head hunter -- employment agency. Consider working as a contractor which will get you in the door, and experience.

This last post was not meant to offend anyone, especially those who consider these as "things", and their life or death, whether they are sold for their body parts, as merely a political "wedge issue". To those who think in this way, I offer my apologies for appearing judgemental. I leave judgement to someone else.

Unborn babies [things] can began learning much earlier than doctors originally estimated, according to the results of a Spanish study. The study concluded that babies can hear at 16 weeks gestation, rather than the typically scientifically accepted 26 weeks. The study, led by Dr. Marisa Lopez-Teijon of the Institut Marques in Barcelona, involved 100 pregnant women between the 14th and 39th week of pregnancy. Researchers used a device called a Babypod, which was inserted into the vagina, to play Partita in A Minor by Johann Sebastian Bach. The babies [things] responded to the music, indicating they could hear. Doctors said almost half moved during the music, making head and limb movements as if they were dancing. Another 30 percent began moving their tongues or mouths. Ten percent stuck their tongues out, doctors said. Researchers said they know the music caused the babies to move because most stopped their movements when the music ended. Not only did the babies move – doctors said they sang. Video shows the child moving its mouth and tongue, and it looks like singing. Doctors said it isn’t uncommon for babies to respond to sounds with movements that look like they are trying to speak or communicate. However, researchers never anticipated these movements to happen so early in the pregnancy. Researchers wrote on the Institut Marques website that this proves children can learn before they are born. That will be a major advantage to new parents and doctors, researchers said. “We are aware of and recognize the importance of talking to babies [YES, THESE ARE BABIES] from the moment they are born to promote neurological stimulation. Now we have the amazing opportunity to do this much sooner, which is a huge advance,” researchers wrote. Experiments with headphones on the mother’s stomach did not result in the babies making similar movements. Researchers said babies could hear their mother’s voice, her heartbeat and the sound of her heels on the floor, but only faintly due to the barrier of the stomach wall.http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-startling-footage-of-16-week-old-unborn-baby-catches-doctors-completely-off-guard/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=57&v=n9AWjb0D8gw

CRITIC Mormons and slavery RESPONSE The Mormon church had no official doctrine regarding slaveholding but in 1836 Joseph Smith wrote that masters should treat slaves humanely and that slaves owed their owners obedience. During his presidential campaign in 1844, however, he came out for abolition. One reason given for the persecution of the Mormons in Missouri was that most of them, migrating from the northern states, were opposed to slavery, and that was a very contested issue in Missouri at that time. http://www.blacklds.org/history (see the mob manifesto of 1833) There were three slaves which accompanied the pioneers to Utah in 1847. (One of them, Green Flake was given his freedom by Brigham young in 1854) http://www.blacklds.org/flake In 1851 Apostle Orson Hyde said the church would not interfere in relations between master and slave. Slaveholding was legally sanctioned in 1852, but "stipulated that slaves could be declared free if their masters abused them. Records document the sale of a number of slaves in Utah." http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/pioneers_and_cowboys/slaveryinutah.html

Yeah, and it would help if we could only get shooters to text while they are shooting.

Security at our stake conference-- We have several members who are police officers, and carry weapons off duty. When a General Authority was visiting stake conference, one of them was sitting on on the far left side of the stand and was constantly scanning the audience. The look on his face clearly said, "Don't try it." When the conference was over, I went up to meet the GA, and it was obvious that he was carefully being watched over by several people. After all, this is the South.

CRITIC The Book of Mormon is racist -- quotes scriptures that the dark skin is a curse RESPONSE Can I assume that you have never actually read the Book of Mormon completely because the book itself addresses that issue. The antiMormons's favorite technique is to quote out of context. They "forget" to give the full context of the text of the Bookof Mormon, so let's look at what it says. Jacob 3 [5] Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you .... [7] Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children; and their unbelief and their hatred towards you is because of the iniquity of their fathers; wherefore, how much better are you than they, in the sight of your great Creator? [8] O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. Hel 6 [1]...the Lamanites had become, the more part of them, a righteous people, insomuch that their righteousness did exceed that of the Nephites because of their firmness and their steadiness in the faith. Also see Alma 25 and 27. It tell us that many Lamanites were converted (Alma 17-23), and they sacrificed their lives for their belief in Christ. The antiMormons have poisoned your mind, my friend

CRITIC Mormons are racist, blah blah blah RESPONSE Growth in Africa http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865638671/Major-LDS-growth-in-Africa-unaffected-by-priesthood-restriction-Elder-Sitati-says.html http://www.ldsliving.com/Church-Announces-Temple-Groundbreakings-in-Africa-and-South-America/s/80772?utm_source=ldsliving&utm_medium=email Elder Bednar Dedicates New Missionary Training Center in Ghana Dedication services were held today in Ghana at the new missionary training center (MTC) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The new facility is located next to the Accra Ghana Temple in the African country where the Church is flourishing. http://www.mormonnewsroom.com.gh/elder-bednar-dedicates-new-missionary-training-center-in-ghana A contribution to Black History and Ancestry http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/historic-freedmen-records-released Here is Elder Dube, a General Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, speaking in the world-wide General Conference Here is what we believe http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/racial-remarks-in-washington-post-article Here are some videos you might find of interest regarding the church and Africa and blacks. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/one-hundred-thousand-africans-find-joy-in-continent-wide--mormon-helping-hands--project

CRITIC Mormon church is a cult -- RESPONSE Chartismatic leader That is why the Jews called Christians a cult. They had a charismatic Messiah who preached, healed, etc, and their leaders were very dedicated. Look at Paul. Can you blame them for calling the Christian church a cult or sect?? Acts 24:5. And the Christian church almost worships Paul, reading his epistles and when he disagrees with what Christ taught, well that's just too bad. Just ask them whether baptism is necessary for salvation -- what did Christ say and what do they teach -- the gospel of Paul. Obviously the antiMormons are NOT Christians because.... well, that is a cult with a charismatic leader. Secret Rites He's being cute and clever. If Christ really taught secret rites and doctrines, how we we know? Well, they are secret, right. But there is a couple of clues in the Bible that tell us about that-- Acts 1:4-5 tells us that after the resurrection of Christ, He went to the disciples and taught them for 40 days. Now, my clever friend, what EXACTLY did He teach them? Did he simply repeat the Sermon on the Mount 5,000 times? Forty days is a very long time to be teaching. Give us some quotes from that sermon, please. Silence? Well, we get clues from the apostles. Peter tells us that the gospel will be preached to the dead so that they will be judged equally with those who heard the gospel preached in this life. Just think how many billions of people have never even heard of Christ -- Peter tells us that they will also have that opportunity. And Paul, he tells us about the three kingdoms of glory. He tells us that the Christians did baptisms for the dead -- after all, Christ told us that this was necessary for salvation. Yes, antiMormons are not Christian, because... well, it is a cult with secrets and at least one secret rite -- baptism for the dead. There are those who call these “secrets”, but Christ said, “it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” They are indeed sacred, and Christ has commanded us to keep them from the world.

CRITIC (regarding the previous post) Mormons appear to be hostile to the Bible. RESPONSE I'm merely pointing out that the arguments by the antiMormons are based on ignorance. The scripture you quoted does not contradict the several instances of where God "changed His mind" -- it only appears that way. Just as Christ asked, "Who touched me", He already know who it was. Now this is also the case of the "false prophecies" of Joseph Smith. I'm not going to waste time explaining each one of these. Remember that the antiMormons not only are believers but also godless atheists and agnostics as well. The only requirement to join that club is a hatred and disdain for Mormonism -- anyone can join in the attacks. You will notice that they use the same arguments against Mormonism as they do against the Bible and Christianity -- they are blind and deaf to the things of the spirit. They use archaeology and historical analysis to disprove the Bible -- claiming it is based on mythology. But the Lord has given us the way to find the truth -- when Christ said, "Seek, and ye shall find, ask and it shall be given to you", He was not talking about archaeology or philosophical debates, Matt 16 [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: **for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.**

CRITIC Joseph Smith made false prophecies. RESPONSE Each of these Biblical prophets give UNCONDITIONAL prophecies. **We agree that there are no excuses even as you give no excuses to Joseph Smith** Is that a fair test? 1. Jonah prophecy -- Jonah 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 -- prophecy -- 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. Nathan result -- Nathan gave an UNCONDITIONAL prophecy, and it failed. David did not build the temple, but his son built it. These three Bible prophets failed your test. YOU say they are false prophets, but GOD says they are true prophets. YOU are the one who has failed the test by renouncing God's true prophets.

CRITIC KJV Translation Errors in the BM Isaiah RESPONSE You have merely stated the obvious. But you have given a very simplistic, one-sided view of this issue. More than half of the 400 verses quoted from Isaiah are different from the KJV test. So what about the differences in the texts? What do these changes tell us about the text. http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/the-bible-and-the-book-of-mormon For example, many of these differences are found in the Septuagint as welll as other Greek codices. See footnote 8. "Both English translations of the Septuagint are from the Codex Vaticanus. Passages marked with an asterisk indicate that the two English versions differ and the Book of Mormon agrees only with Lancelot Brenton’s version. It would have been impossible for Joseph Smith to fake these passages since Brenton’s translation was published 21 years after the Book of Mormon. Some passages in the Book of Mormon agree with other Greek codices such as Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus. Some of those parallels are pointed out by Sperry, p. 403." CRITIC Why did Joseph Smith copy directly from the KJV? RESPONSE One possible answer has been proposed, based on the translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. "Even academic translators sometimes copy a previous translation if it serves the purpose of their translation. For example, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) provided previously unknown texts for many Biblical writings. However, in some translations of the DSS, approximately 90% is simply copied from the KJV. Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from already known Hebrew manuscripts.[17] Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this. This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the King James (or any other) translation represented a true difference in the DSS text, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve existing translations. The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analogous. For example, it is possible that most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in later Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were theologically significant differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference." http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Translation_Errors_from_the_KJV

For anyone who is interested. I am logging off this forum, and not sure when I will be back.

"Thing"???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Fortunately this forum has a blocking feature. I was about to say something to you that would get me kicked off this forum, so I will go to the bathroom, and throw up instead. I have never been so disgusted in my life. I have ten "things" which I call my grandchildren. My youngest THING is two years old. Thank God that my daughter did not think she was a "certain thing", something to have a partial birth abortion, something to have her body parts sold or disposed as biological waste.

Ah, yes. Reminds me of something called the Dredd Scott decision. Just a Guy suggests: Anyway, of course case law will never be be changed, unless such a law is passed which is then appealed to the Supreme Court.based on NEW scientific evidence. Does that make sense? Or is that something that is "only symbolic". We have someone who knows his history. Sounds like the Huckabee solution.

Thanks, I'll include this in the speech. It certainly will keep him from going to the bottom rung of the telestial kingdom, and perhaps notch it up to the terrestrial.

Let me humm the tune for you. This is how it begins --->> la la la la laaa, la laalaa la lala etc Sound familiar? I apologize if it is out of tune.

This is not a story about the Mormons but about the people of El Paso who helped out refugees who just happened to be Mormons. The moral of the story is that El Paso was rewarded for their charity when the refugees integrated into their society and their contributions to the city. It is very topical considering what is happening in Europe to the Syrian refugees and even those south of our borders. We need to consider that, while they are poor and homeless, how they may become an important part of our community and what they can contribute to our city. That is a story that needs to be told. Perhaps you can find another example if you don't want to mention the Mormons.

Let's see if we can help him out with his speech ==>> Most merciful, gracious, loving, kind Father, you certainly know all things, and how many times I have stated in public that I am opposed to abortion. It is a horrible practice. And I see the law of stewardship as a very important principle. I am the leader of a powerful political party, and I have certain responsibilities. They expect a great deal from me, where I must show my leadership even when I am personally opposed. In this case I actually did not vote FOR late-term abortions, only to slow down the process of passing a ban against it. My party demanded a very difficult decision, and USING THE LAW OF STEWARDSHIP that we are taught in the temple and the scriptures, I did my DUTY to cast the vote that I did. I am sure you would understand my situation, as a humble servant in your service, most merciful, kind, patient, loving, forgiving Father in Heaven. --------- Any other suggestions? (Excuse me. I'm feeling sick and disgusted)

Said nothing about a temple recommend. I am simply making a point that the day will come when we will personally have to give an accounting for our decisions, both inside and outside the church. Thinking that we can use the excuse "Church is church, and politics is politics" is an illusion. I think that justifying one's effort to make such abortions legal will require his most eloquent rhetorical skills. Perhaps he should begin preparing that speech now. This is a project that may take many decades to complete, and he may run out of time.

No

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency(the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine Taylor confused the doctrine of polygamy (as expressed by his father) with the practice of polygamy (Wilford Woodruff). The doctrine is still in effect, the only change is how it is practiced. And it cannot be practiced unless the one who holds the key (the President of the Church) permits it. His excommunication was not over polygamy but over the issue of who holds the keys 1. Get your facts straight. 2. "I really don't know what I am talking about." No you don't. You are just repeating rumors and gossip. ++++++++++++++++ Just an observation -->> You are walking down a path which may lead you to a place where you do not want to go. My personal attitude to this issue is that there are some things I do not understand, and it is ok to ask questions. In some cases it will take many years to understand what is going on, as I get more knowledge, insight, and spiritual maturity.