Evangelicals and Mormons

[jerome1232]

Even the Book of Mormon is written in 16th century English...who knew that "reformed Egyptian" would translate nicely into archaic English

Is there a compelling reason for him to not translate into the same English he was used to scripture being written in?

To use any other translation, no matter there are those with better scholarship

Although I'm certainly not very educated in this light, I've heard from other sources that this is somewhat debatable. Regardless I haven't heard of any proven, glaring errors in the KJV that would warrant a shift to another translation.

I wonder, too, why the LDS Church does not dump all versions of the Bible except the one that Joseph Smith "translated" and declared complete and finished.

It is incomplete and unfinished, even though it's referred to as the JST, it's better thought of as inspired commentary, not translation. The few parts that are completed are included in the Pearl of Great Price and are used in our standard works.

I was genuinely curious about your view the sections I asked you about earlier, I wasn't expecting the spit and venom you shot back. I haven't had time to go and reread it since I did quickly glance and may have gotten it out of context.

In my experience if you want to educate someone about another way of seeing things, patient teaching works much better than beating it in with a cudgel, sharp retorts, and boasting of your own intellect. I have personally learned a lot on these forums about mainstream Christianity that I previously misunderstood from posters like PrisonChaplain (chiefly the Trinity)

[bytor2112]

Just a thought and an opinion: I believe that the Mormon Church insistence on use of the KJV exclusively in any official situation is that it was the Bible used by Joseph Smith when he came up with Mormon theology. To use any other translation, no matter there are those with better scholarship, that might in any way change the nuance or understanding of any passage that seemingly supports LDS interpretation would create a problem. The KJV, as good as it is, uses archaic English and words with archaic meaning not in common usage today. Even the Book of Mormon is written in 16th century English...who knew that "reformed Egyptian" would translate nicely into archaic English But then again, at the risk of sounding sarcastic, there's always the get out of jail free card of "as far as it is translated correctly". I wonder, too, why the LDS Church does not dump all versions of the Bible except the one that Jospeh Smith "translated" and declared complete and finished.

"came up with Mormon theology" .....ah Pendragon....you slay me

Edited February 15, 2012 by bytor2112

[pendragon]

Bytor: Glad to provide a chuckle but looked at realistically if I do not consider Smith as a genuine prophet but a fraud, surely I would assume he made the whole thing up. Wouldn't that be my obvious conclusion. Smith's whole history, from his conviction for "glass looking" in treasure hunting schemes to his creation of a whole new "theology" surely would take those who do not accept his claims to that conclusion. Why should that surprise you?

[pendragon]

Jerome: I have gone over the thread and can find no instance where I used "spit and venom" nor am I guilty of "boasting of intellect" . To my recollection I haven't even used the word intellect. In one instance I was short, perhaps with you, in responding to a post that appeared to be stock LDS quotes but I have acknowledged that. If I missing something perhaps you can't direct me to specifics.

As regards Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible I think that perhaps you are unaware that he himself declared it finished.

Re the KJV...I did not suggest there were errors but better translations because of improved scholarship. I guess technically there's nothing wrong with a Model T...driving one today would probably get you where you want to go but a 2012 Fusion would do a better job.

My own view as one who rejects Joseph Smith's claims is that he did not translate anything but that it is written in archaic language to give it the flavor of holy writ.

I believe the KJV to be one of the greatest contributions to the world in the English language. It has certainly had immeasurable impact on the world and the advancement of the Gospel but people simply don't speak that way any longer.

[jerome1232]

As regards Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible I think that perhaps you are unaware that he himself declared it finished.

Please provide the reference.

Edited February 15, 2012 by jerome1232

[Just_A_Guy]

Just-a-guy: From my perspective you appear to be adding 1 and 1 and coming up with five. No matter how you want to interpret the passage you cannot change what is says and the premise of the chapter, clearly stated . . .

A simple "No, JAG, I cannot address the three concerns you brought up, so I will merely repeat my wholly conclusory statement" would have sufficed.

("Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him. we ask you brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come") is what must happen prior to the second coming of Jesus and prior when "the man of lawlessness", the full demonstration of the state of fallen man, is revealed. The anti-Christ is the symbol of that. The anti-Christ is the symbol of that.

See above.

As I said earlier, to argue that differences of opinion and problems within the Thessalonian church are signs of a complete collapse and failure of the Gospel . . .

Not the Gospel, the Church. Please stop trying to misrepresent my words. It's none of my business whether you believe in a deity who excuses deceitful behavior. But it's very much my business when you paint a deliberately misleading impression of my position; and I confess I'm liable to get a bit cranky when you do it.

. . . carries no more weight than me trying to suggest that the large number of people leaving the Mormon Church is evidence of its imminent total collapse. I wish it were true...but wishing doesn't make it so.

So we're back to square one: If the primitive Church retained doctrinal and spiritual purity, then why aren't you a Catholic?

Just a thought and an opinion: I believe that the Mormon Church insistence on use of the KJV exclusively in any official situation is that it was the Bible used by Joseph Smith when he came up with Mormon theology. To use any other translation, no matter there are those with better scholarship, that might in any way change the nuance or understanding of any passage that seemingly supports LDS interpretation would create a problem. The KJV, as good as it is, uses archaic English and words with archaic meaning not in common usage today.

This is richly ironic, considering that I've already shown you in this thread how the KJV of 2 Thessalonians 2 is actually more reliable and catches the nuance of the original Greek better than the newer, more "scholarly" translation you offered.

Moreover, I have already pointed out that the LDS Church does not insist on the "exclusive" use of the KJV. Again: Please stop misrepresenting our positions. Seriously. It's getting tiresome.

I wonder, too, why the LDS Church does not dump all versions of the Bible except the one that Jospeh Smith "translated" and declared complete and finished.

1) Because the manuscript remained with Joseph Smith's family, and thence to the RLDS Church; and the leadership of the Utah church had no opportunity to confirm the manuscript's integrity until Robert Matthews was permitted to access RLDS archives and scrutinize the original in the early 1970s.

2) Because while Sidney Rigdon (not Joseph Smith--see History of the Church 1:368-389) declared the work "finished" in 1833, Smith himself continued to tinker with the manuscript for much of the next decade.

[Vort]

Not the Gospel, the Church. Please stop trying to misrepresent my words. It's none of my business whether you believe in a deity who excuses deceitful behavior. But it's very much my business when you paint a deliberately misleading impression of my position; and I confess I'm liable to get a bit cranky when you do it.

By his own admission, he worships a different Jesus from the Biblical Christ worshiped by us. So why would his "Jesus" not tell him deliberately to mislead and misrepresent us? Perhaps that is exactly what his "Jesus" has told him to do. It appears he is being faithful to the god he claims to worship.

[prisonchaplain]

I'm getting very uncomfortable with the tone and purpose of some of these last posts. Let's keep the discussion doctrinal, and avoid personal comments.

[bytor2112]

Bytor: Glad to provide a chuckle but looked at realistically if I do not consider Smith as a genuine prophet but a fraud, surely I would assume he made the whole thing up. Wouldn't that be my obvious conclusion. Smith's whole history, from his conviction for "glass looking" in treasure hunting schemes to his creation of a whole new "theology" surely would take those who do not accept his claims to that conclusion. Why should that surprise you?

I thought the very same thing once upon a time...how wrong I was.....

[john doe]

Let me drop in to reiterate this:

This site is not a debate site to discuss whether the LDS Church is true. This site takes that fact as a given. If you wish to debate the truthfulness of the LDS Church, then you need to find another site to do it in. This site is reserved for frank and genial discussion of LDS Church doctrines and practices within the framework of the belief that the LDS Church is true. If you are uncomfortable with that assertion, then it is suggested that you find another site to debate those things. Rule #1 states:

1. Do not post, upload, or otherwise submit anything to the site that is derogatory towards The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its teachers, or its leaders. Anti-LDS Propaganda will not be tolerated anywhere.

While we enjoy the interactions we have with those of other faiths who visit this site, when they turn antagonistic towards the LDS Church, its beliefs, or its leaders, we will take appropriate actions to protect the integrity of our vision.

[NeuroTypical]

...looked at realistically if I do not consider Smith as a genuine prophet but a fraud, surely I would assume he made the whole thing up. Wouldn't that be my obvious conclusion.

Since Joseph started telling of his experiences, that is one way his critics attempted to explain him away, yes. Other critics who study his life more closely, find that explanation doesn't fit the mountains of facts indicating Joseph actually believed his story. So the more educated a critic becomes, the more likely they are to move to the explanation that he was sincere, but deluded or insane.

Actually, I've had some critics try to tell me that Joseph was both a fraud, totally sincere, tricking people on purpose, and utterly devout - all at the same time. Those critics have at best, a passing aquaintance with logic, and most thinking people tend to dismiss them out of hand.

I've also heard that Joseph was a lazy no-account ignorant slacker, as well as a brilliant devious schemer who sat up nights figuring out ways to steal men's souls and money.

Pendragon, your brand of LDS criticism was more popular back in the '80's and '90's, back when you were fighting against unarmed opponents. Those days are long gone.

[pendragon]

Vort: Can you give a single instance of where I have misrepresented you or Mormon belief? I know exactly what Mormon belief is...likely as well as you. I have given my view, I have given scripture and verse to demonstrate my case but it appears you prefer to attack my honesty rather than refute what I have presented. I am still waiting for your followup on the "three heavens" issue that you raised many posts ago and which I answered fully and completely from the scripture as written. Message and messenger come to mind.

[prisonchaplain]

This thread has degenerated, so I am closing it. Posters are reminded that derogatory statements against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not permitted. Also, personal attacks are to be avoided. Simply expressing that a derrogatory statement is an opinion does not excuse it. Let's keep the conversation about issues, and remain respectful.

Edited February 15, 2012 by prisonchaplain