The People before Adam

[RRR1]

RRR1.....you have already said that you haven't read the Bible cover to cover. So, why would anyone view you as any kind of scriptural authority? The Bible is TRUE...it is not however without error and it most definitely IS incomplete.

have you ever heard of an oxymoron? The Bible is TRUE and the BIBLE has errors do not go together. Hope this helps.

[Snow]

have you ever heard of an oxymoron? The Bible is TRUE and the BIBLE has errors do not go together. Hope this helps.

No - it doesn't help. You, as a factual matter, are plain and simply wrong. Your belief in a Bible that is error free is not based on anything in the Bible itself, it based only on your wish that it were so. You are not knowledgeable, not only about the text of the Bible, but also about what books are in the Bible. You are in no position to offer an informed opinion. You simply have an opinion because that's what someone told you that you should believe.

People who have actually read and studied the Bible know a lot more than you about it.

[JohnnyRudick]

Based on our sample of problems in the differing bible texts,

Which Bible is the true copy of the original autographs?

[bytor2112]

have you ever heard of an oxymoron? The Bible is TRUE and the BIBLE has errors do not go together. Hope this helps.

Not an oxymoron RRR1. The Bible contains Gospel truths, but it also contains the errors of men.

[RRR1]

No - it doesn't help. You, as a factual matter, are plain and simply wrong. Your belief in a Bible that is error free is not based on anything in the Bible itself, it based only on your wish that it were so. You are not knowledgeable, not only about the text of the Bible, but also about what books are in the Bible. You are in no position to offer an informed opinion. You simply have an opinion because that's what someone told you that you should believe.

People who have actually read and studied the Bible know a lot more than you about it.

This post is so stupid that the only response you get is

[RRR1]

Based on our sample of problems in the differing bible texts,

Which Bible is the true copy of the original autographs?

Im not sure why some verses are omitted and some versions include those verses. This however does not mean that verse is false. All the other verses you included that had no differences between translations.

[RRR1]

Not an oxymoron RRR1. The Bible contains Gospel truths, but it also contains the errors of men.

Exactly. Man got his little pen and paper and physically wrote this stuff down so it was written by men. However, since we both know the Bible is God breathed we know that the Bible is really God written. So since you claim the Bible has errors and we have already established that God is Truth and God is the source of Truth, your claim means the whole entire Bible is false. Not sure what language you speak, but if you can read and understand English, you know this to be true.

[bytor2112]

Exactly. Man got his little pen and paper and physically wrote this stuff down so it was written by men. However, since we both know the Bible is God breathed we know that the Bible is really God written. So since you claim the Bible has errors and we have already established that God is Truth and God is the source of Truth, your claim means the whole entire Bible is false. Not sure what language you speak, but if you can read and understand English, you know this to be true.

I speak and read English quite well. The Bible being "God breathed" is a false notion, as is much of what you assert as being true. You are either childishly stubborn or ridiculously ignorant. Either way, until you seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost you will likely remain in your state of Spiritual darkness and continue to revel in ignorance. There are a great many non-LDS, Orthodox Christian sources that could enlighten and reinforce what many have posted here.....but you would probably question whether or not they could read and understand English. Before you read any of those volumes though, you might actually read the book that you claim is God breathed.

[JohnnyRudick]

Im not sure why some verses are omitted and some versions include those verses. This however does not mean that verse is false. All the other verses you included that had no differences between translations.

[marts1]

I believe we dont need prophets nowadays. Once Jesus died and the veil was torn, anyone could enter the Holy of Holies. Once Jesus died everything changed. We dont need a High Priest of prophet to guide us. We can go to God directly.

Is there not much direction in the bible which was written after Christ's death?

[Snow]

Snow, prove that Maccabees is in the Bible. Once you do that, I will sell all my posessions. I will then fly to wherever you are in this world and give you all the money I have. Seems like I know more about the Bible than you.

USCCB - NAB - 2 Maccabees 7

Douay-Rheims Bible, First Book Of Machabees Chapter 2

Bible, Revised Standard Version

Latin Vulgate Bible with Douay-Rheims and King James Version Side-by-Side+Complete Sayings of Jesus Christ

Bring cash, I don't want checks.

Edited May 3, 2010 by Snow

[RRR1]

I speak and read English quite well. The Bible being "God breathed" is a false notion, as is much of what you assert as being true. You are either childishly stubborn or ridiculously ignorant. Either way, until you seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost you will likely remain in your state of Spiritual darkness and continue to revel in ignorance. There are a great many non-LDS, Orthodox Christian sources that could enlighten and reinforce what many have posted here.....but you would probably question whether or not they could read and understand English. Before you read any of those volumes though, you might actually read the book that you claim is God breathed.

Ok Im glad you can read. Go read 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Then read 2 Peter 1:20-21. Oh wait you have read those verses. You think they are false, gotcha. Well you know what? Listen up because if that isnt true, then Jesus didnt die for me and you. Jesus was just another man who died, no big deal, people die everyday. And since Jesus is God and Jesus was just another man that died, God doesnt exist. That also means God did not create the Earth. Also there is no heaven. Now I dont know if there is a hell or not but there is no heaven. So if I were you I would stop trying to get in because you arent getting in.

[RRR1]

Is there not much direction in the bible which was written after Christ's death?

Dont you have to win the bet first. :shrug

[HiJolly]

[Snow]

RR1,

What plane flight are you going to be on?

[pam]

He's already been escorted out of here and put on a flight.

[bytor2112]

Ok Im glad you can read. Go read 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Then read 2 Peter 1:20-21. Oh wait you have read those verses. You think they are false, gotcha. Well you know what? Listen up because if that isnt true, then Jesus didnt die for me and you. Jesus was just another man who died, no big deal, people die everyday. And since Jesus is God and Jesus was just another man that died, God doesnt exist. That also means God did not create the Earth. Also there is no heaven. Now I dont know if there is a hell or not but there is no heaven. So if I were you I would stop trying to get in because you arent getting in.

No....I don't think they are false. I don't think the Bible is false and I absolutely believe the Bible to be inspired by God. I do not however, believe that the Bible is complete or without error. Why are you SO obtuse?

[Snow]

Exactly. Man got his little pen and paper and physically wrote this stuff down so it was written by men. However, since we both know the Bible is God breathed we know that the Bible is really God written. So since you claim the Bible has errors and we have already established that God is Truth and God is the source of Truth, your claim means the whole entire Bible is false. Not sure what language you speak, but if you can read and understand English, you know this to be true.

While I wait for you to arrive via plane to turn all your money over to me - per your promise, can you tell me if you have any evidence for your claim (above in quotes).

Can you tell me if God agrees with you?

[Moksha]

Getting back to the People before Adam, I am curious as to whether there are any scriptures alluding to these people? Perhaps at least in terms of the daughter-in-laws of Adam?

[Guest TheWayTheTruthTheLife]

He's already been escorted out of here and put on a flight.

well Im back :) I assume you are the one that banned me since you have this douchebag post. There are numerous moderator posts in this thread, yet none of them told me to stop, calm down etc. Are there no private messages on this forum?

You banned me for bashing LDS religion? Really I was banned for proving Christianity right. And in turn proving Mormons and LDS wrong. I guess you can call that bashing if you want. The brainwashing that goes on here is unbelievable. You cant even recognize truth when its right in front of your face. Its amazing how people here claim to trust the Bible and recognize it to the truth yet pick to shreads. You believe in it but go out of your way to prove parts of it wrong:o I bet you do that to the Book of Mormon too. You believe it to be inspired by God and to be true, but you pick it to pieces. This proves you really dont believe in it in the first place. They have done a good job of brainwashing you. I just hope individuals here would stop listening to this hogwash and dig a little deeper. Then you will find the Book of Mormon is false and the Bible is 100% true and the only true book about God.

Its actually been fun talking to you guys and for the most part the converstation has been civil. But once I starting proving my point over and over again, your mods (Pam) decided its enough. Pam doesnt want the people here reading the truth. Because if they did, they would understand and leave LDS. I'll be praying for everyone here that not only will they learn the truth, that they will accept it.

[Guest Godless]

Good-bye again.

[Traveler]

What concerns me is your belief in a book that you claim to be false. Its almost funny.

It is interesting to me how you judge me saying I do not believe scripture based on a false premises that the L-rd has cautioned and warned should not be used to judge. So I feel that I need to write somewhat of my understanding of scriptures and other gifts of G-d given to man. Anciently it was written that G-d commanded Moses to make two tokens of the covenant of the people with G-d. The first token, given by commandment, was to write scripture that we now have as the first 5 books of the Bible. This gift was given to help the “children” of Israel to remember their covenant with G-d to accept him as their source of truth and provider of law.

The second commandment was that Moses was to engrave a serpent on a pole. This gift was given to help the “children” of Israel to remember to look unto the L-rd to be healed from the things of this mortal world. But the two gifts were given as “one” just as the two dreams of Pharaoh was to be understood as one.

But the children of Israel began to look upon the serpent on the pole as the source of healing and they did worship it as breathed of G-d according to the temptations of Satan. Therefore the sacred serpent was no longer a symbol of healing coming from G-d as the source but the gift of G-d was use as a symbol whereby the covenant was lost to a false worship of the gift.

So also are the scriptures are used today – not to remind the children of covenant to look to the L-rd for truth and law and to pray unto G-d for knowledge and understanding by covenant. Instead they worship the scriptures as if breathed of G-d according to the temptations of Satan. Therefore the sacred scriptures are no longer a symbol to bring them unto G-d to learn of the mysteries of his creation and of his law but as a symbol of false worship to contend with one another.

In the name of such false worship was the genocide of the Lucayan people justified because they would not convert to the false Christianity. Not only were the Lucayan people murdered by “Christians” of that day but no Christian within 150 years of that era to speak up or defend them. Christianity had become a tradition of Christianity based on the Bible as the source of truth and turned into a tradition of murder and oppression. Also in the name of false worship did Charlemagne murder more people of northern Europe that did die of the dreaded Black Plague to justify the conversion of the rest of the people to such a false Christianity. I would also remind you that it was through Charlemagne that the ancient Masoretic Text became the source to canonize the version of the Bible that is used today to define canon (all scripture) for traditional Christianity.

I believe that in the economy of G-d that the L-rd has restored his covenant in these last days as he has always restored his covenant. Not that scriptures or serpents on poles are worshiped but that we come unto G-d as our only source of healing, truth and law concerning the mysteries of eternity.

The Traveler

[Finrock]

Good afternoon Snow. I hope you enjoyed your weekend! :)

Well Finrock,

You are a commendably jovial and good-natured fellow.

Some would debate that, but thank you.

Before I respond to your post, I think it requires additional clarification:

You accept or at least do not reject evolution. By that do you mean that man may have evolved from some hominid prior to man but that the particular man, Adam, did not evolve?

It might be helpful to declare an assumption. My basic premise is that scripture and official declarations of truth from the Church constitutes the word of God, which trumps secularly reasoned facts in all cases and in all circumstances.

My argument about the origin of man doesn't deny or confirm the general process of evolution as an actual phenomenon. In short, my argument says that whatever the case may be regarding any explanation as to the origin of man, it is a fact that Church doctrine and scripture officially teaches that (1)Adam was the first "man", that (2)Adam did not evolve from a lower species, and the third claim, although analytically contained in the first claim, is that (3)there was no "man" prior to Adam. As a consequence of this prophetically revealed and doctrinally binding truth as to the origin of man, any explanation that contravenes one or more elements of this doctrinal and scriptural truth, must be false.

I justify my claim that my argument about the origin of man doesn't deny or confirm the general process of evolution as an actual phenomenon, because there is nothing in the scriptural and doctrinal fact about the origin of man that would automatically eliminate evolution as a phenomenon, although it may require that certain understandings regarding evolution be rejected in light of revealed truth.

As far as your other questions...I don't have any specific or single hypothesis that I subscribe to as to how the scriptural and doctrinal position of the Church regarding the origin of man fits in to currently accepted scientific understanding of evolution. This should not be misunderstood to mean that I accept everything about the currently accepted scientific understanding of evolution. Please understand, as well, that this subject matter of evolution and the subject matter of the questions asked in your post, constitute a different subject matter and argument than what I was originally, and that I am currently, postulating. Although I have no objection to exploring my beliefs on evolution, I don't want to abandon the discussion of my original point.

Regards,

Finrock

[Finrock]

Good afternoon Moksha. I hope you are doing well today! :)

Finrock, I am curious as to how you would explain the similarity in DNA between the chimp and Man?

I don't think I could nor do I think I have to, as far as my position is concerned, that is. :)

Regards,

Finrock

[JohnnyRudick]

Good afternoon Snow. I hope you enjoyed your weekend! :)

Some would debate that, but thank you.

It might be helpful to declare an assumption. My basic premise is that scripture and official declarations of truth from the Church constitutes the word of God, which trumps secularly reasoned facts in all cases and in all circumstances.

My argument about the origin of man doesn't deny or confirm the general process of evolution as an actual phenomenon. In short, my argument says that whatever the case may be regarding any explanation as to the origin of man, it is a fact that Church doctrine and scripture officially teaches that (1)Adam was the first "man", that (2)Adam did not evolve from a lower species, and the third claim, although analytically contained in the first claim, is that (3)there was no "man" prior to Adam. As a consequence of this prophetically revealed and doctrinally binding truth as to the origin of man, any explanation that contravenes one or more elements of this doctrinal and scriptural truth, must be false.

I justify my claim that my argument about the origin of man doesn't deny or confirm the general process of evolution as an actual phenomenon, because there is nothing in the scriptural and doctrinal fact about the origin of man that would automatically eliminate evolution as a phenomenon, although it may require that certain understandings regarding evolution be rejected in light of revealed truth.

As far as your other questions...I don't have any specific or single hypothesis that I subscribe to as to how the scriptural and doctrinal position of the Church regarding the origin of man fits in to currently accepted scientific understanding of evolution. This should not be misunderstood to mean that I accept everything about the currently accepted scientific understanding of evolution. Please understand, as well, that this subject matter of evolution and the subject matter of the questions asked in your post, constitute a different subject matter and argument than what I was originally, and that I am currently, postulating. Although I have no objection to exploring my beliefs on evolution, I don't want to abandon the discussion of my original point.

Regards,

Finrock

I guess I get from this that you believe what ever

I would like for you to believe?

As for me and my house. . .