• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured LDS More Information:

Discussion in 'Debate Other Religions & Faiths' started by Phoebe Ann, Sep 29, 2017.

  1. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    You are taking one incident and applying it to a whole different scenario--in other words---You are comparing apples and oranges. The burning bush is in no way the same as JS being told to decipher a strange language using rocks in hat. Alas-----God had spoken directly to His prophets for 1000's of years--totaling more than 500 times. So you're argument falls apart right there. JS never once even tested this spirit to see if it was of God. Either JS was deceived, or he is the deceiver. Either way, this is not of God.
    God did not need to tell Jerome or Tyndale what to write. The Hebrew language existed, still does. There are people who can translate it, without using rocks in a hat. And there are Jewish scholars who speak English and can help. There are writings in the original language that can be examined. None of this can be said for any of His writings. It takes a huge, giant, totally incredulous leap of logic to accept this as how God chose to work through JS only.

    Why are you hung up on son of God or a son of a god?? I already said, it is no stretch to understand that Nebby was a pagan who wanted himself to be thought of as a god and had no problem seeing that 4th individual as obviously divine---to matters not one diddly squat to me whether it translates son of a god or Son of God. It doesn't matter who said it, heard it or wrote it, to me. This is the word of God and JS was totally and completely wrong. His translation can not be verified by anyone---not to it's very existence, nor if the translated it correctly. There may be 2 different ways to interpret this verse, but guess what----you can still check it against copies that Jesus Christ was raised on, memorized, quoted and believed. None of JS writings were around for Jesus to comment on.
     
  2. Peter1000

    Peter1000 Well-Known Member

    +334
    Mormon
    Married
    OK, we have come to this point on this subject. I will respond 1 more time and then you can respond and have the last word. I will not respond again.

    God had Tyndale and Jerome and a number of scholars to translate the different bible languages into English. And so they took a known tongue and translated it into a known tongue of English.

    What happens when God is faced with a record in an unknown tongue that God wants translated, but no scholar can translate? Does he sit down with the translator and tell him what it says? That would be different than what has ever happened before. Or does he provide a translating devise and the HS to help the person translate. Whether that devise is a Urim and Thumim, or it is a seer-stone, or direct revelation, it does not matter. God wants that book brought forth, so He decides this is the way and makes it happen.
    And it came forth by the power and majesty of God, not by the power of man.

    I am hung up on what are the right words that Nebby said. That is all. I want to know why God told 1 translator that Nebby said 'Son of God', and then told another translator Nebby said 'a son of the gods'. Think about it, if these men were really inspired by the HS, why would 1 of them get it so wrong. And if they got this rather simple text wrong, what else did they get wrong?????

    Thank you for the discussion, but I have said all I can on the subject. We will just have to agree to disagree again.
     
  3. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others

    Same thing He did when the world had no Idea what Egyptian hieroglyphics meant. Not that God needed their ideas learned, but it all came together for the Rosetta stone helped us with other languages also and helped to know more about the Hebrew record also. Throughout history, other unknown languages have had to be learned so that the bible could be given to them also, and it has been done without the need of stones in a hat. There is no unknown language that JS was shown. That is the whole point. It has been examined and the BOM does not add up to a language--period. It is just that you refuse to believe that. As He has always done---anything He wants us to know--He just simply tells us. As He has always done, if there is a tablet that man has written that He wants us to find out what it means, He provides the means to have it deciphered---and He has never---Never, ever, then turned around and gotten rid of the tablet He wanted translated. It stays around to be examined and learned from, if anything, He'll provide more of it to establish it. Through the whole of the middle east---archeology has dug up countless of evidence for the Jews and everything written in the bible. Modern technology has only verified. For years and years, people laughed at Christianity for there were no Hittites ever found. It is now a recognized empire with much known about it. You think something as important as what JS writes about would not have been found out by now--- when even an obscure, pagan nation , as the Hittites, are given more importance than they by their discovery?

    As for Nebby---the thought is the same no matter what the translation. It was a divine person, not a mortal man.
     
  4. withwonderingawe

    withwonderingawe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +505
    Mormon
    Married
    US-Republican
    So no answer or are we just choosing to ignore it?
     
  5. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others

    2 Nephi 18
    22 And they shall look unto the earth and behold trouble, and darkness, dimness of anguish, and shall be driven to darkness.
    2 Nephi 19
    1 Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations.

    Isa 8:22 And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness.
    Isa_9:1 Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations.

    Identical aren't they?


    "So now, let us now proceed to the main topic of this post. Generally, there are two major Bible verse numbering schemes that are present:
    *Hebrew numbering - this is the system used in the Hebrew texts and is used mainly by versions made by Catholics.
    *Geneva/KJV numbering - this is the numbering that was first used in the Medieval times and was subsequently applied to the King James Version. Most Protestant versions of the Bible exclusively use this system. That being said, Protestants don't often encounter problems in numbering differences.
    How to know: Check Genesis 32:1. If you read Laban kissing her grandchildren, then your Bible follows the Hebrew system. Otherwise, your Bible follows the Genevan system."
    Catholic Bibles: Guest Post: Old Testament Verse Numbering Differences


    Isa 9:1 in the Hebrew is Isa 8:23
    There is no Isa. 8:23 in the KJV

    JS has copied this, right down to the dividing of the chapters. Which in the original, was not like that. In fact, there was no dividing into chapters and verses.


    Also the KJV is not in its original 1611 version (which was full of errors). It was revised in 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, and the lastly 1850.

    More:

    In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon, The chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers, The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, The rings, and nose jewels, The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, The glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails.
    Isaiah 3:18-23 (KJV)
    [​IMG] In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments, and cauls, and round tires like the moon, The chains and the bracelets, and the mufflers, The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, The rings, and nose jewels, The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, The glasses, and the fine linen, and hoods, and the vails.
    2 Nephi 13:18-23
    • KJV italicized words
      The King James translation inserted additional words not found in the original texts to help clarify the translation. The KJV distinguished the additional words by italicizing them. We would not expect the Book of Mormon, which was allegedly completed by 421 A.D., to include the identical words that the KJV added centuries later. Yet we see this effect throughout the Book of Mormon. For example:
      Isaiah 9:1 (KJV) 2 Nephi 19:1
      [​IMG] Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations.
      Isaiah 9:1 KJV
      [​IMG] Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations.
      In this example, 2 Nephi 9:1, dated in the Book of Mormon to be around 550 B.C., quotes nearly verbatim from the 1611 A.D. translation of Isaiah 9:1 KJV. and includes the words added (italicized) by the KJV. In addition, Joseph qualified the sea as the Red Sea. The problem is that (a) Jesus Christ quoted Isaiah in Matt. 4:14-15 and did not mention the Red sea, (b) "Red" sea is not found in any source manuscripts, (c) the Red Sea is 250 miles away!
      Malachi 3:10 (KJV) 3 Nephi 24:10
      [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
      Malachi 3:10 KJV
      [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
      3 Nephi 24:10
      In this example, the KJV added seven words not found in the source Hebrew manuscripts to its English translation. The Book of Mormon, which was allegedly completed 1,200 years prior, contains the identical seven words.
    • KJV translation errors
      Our understanding of the Hebrew language today is much more advanced than it was in the 1600's when King James authorized an english translation of the Bible. Somehow the divine process guiding Joseph's "translation" of the Book of Mormon didn't prevent him from making identical translation errors.
      Isaiah 2:16 (KJV) 2 Nephi 12:16
      [​IMG] [​IMG] And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
      Isaiah 2:16 KJV
      [​IMG] [​IMG] ...and upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
      2 Nephi 12:16
      In this example, where the KJV uses pictures, the correct translation should be crafts, or vessels, which also fits the context better.

      Compare these translations: Is. 2:16 NASB, Is. 2:16 NIV

      If Joseph was truly translating an ancient text by the gift and power of God, its inexplicable that he would make the identical error. This is evidence that Joseph was not translating at all but merely copying from a King James Bible.
    • The name Lucifer comes from an improper translation in the King James Version, which name only appears once in Isaiah 14:12. Modern translations correct this, as the passage does not refer to the devil, but to the King of Babylon. That the Book of Mormon repeats the KJV error (2 Nephi 24:12) is evidence against its alleged ancient origin and inspired "translation".
    • See also Quoting from the King James Bible and View of the Hebrews
    • Filler
      In light of the size of the gold plates, all of the abridging, and the difficulty of engraving the plates, the extensive use of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon must be considered filler.
    • Anachronistic
      Some scholars believe that Isaiah chapters 40 to 55 were written during the Babylonian captivity, thus after when the Jews in the Book of Mormon left Jerusalem for the New World. If true, then the quotations of these chapters would be anachronistic.
      See Book of Mormon anachronisms
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2017
  6. withwonderingawe

    withwonderingawe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +505
    Mormon
    Married
    US-Republican
    First an apology, I'm sitting in bed still recovering from my dumb surgery. Im writing on my cell phone typing this and can't cut and paste each question.
    Just bear with me.

    The first question I see says Joseph copied Isaiah right down to the chapter and verse.

    No he didnt. In the original manuscript there are no chapters and verses, no punctuation and no numbering system at all. All of that was added in later, Im not sure which edition. They more than likely used the KJV to do their numbering.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2017
  7. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others

    So sorry---I know what's that's like. In Jan. I had colon surgery. Was in a coma for 2 months on a vent then had to rehab for a month to learn how to do everything again.

    "No he didnt. In the original manuscript there are no chapters and verses, no punctuation and no numbering system at all. All of that was added in later, Im not sure which edition.[/QUOTE]

    Yes, I know. That is exactly what I said. He had it divided and numbered exactly the same way that the KJV has it divided. And it is word for word the KJV, including the punctuation.
     
  8. withwonderingawe

    withwonderingawe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +505
    Mormon
    Married
    US-Republican
    Yes, I know. That is exactly what I said. He had it divided and numbered exactly the same way that the KJV has it divided. And it is word for word the KJV, including the punctuation.[/QUOTE]

    My surgery is because of my pride. I got a silver in my butt and didn't want to show my butt to a doctor, hadnt done that since my last baby 35 years ago. It got infected and formed a cyst the size of an egg. Had to have major surgery to cut it out, now you can go have a good laugh, everyone else is.
     
  9. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    My surgery is because of my pride. I got a silver in my butt and didn't want to show my butt to a doctor, hadnt done that since my last baby 35 years ago. It got infected and formed a cyst the size of an egg. Had to have major surgery to cut it out, now you can go have a good laugh, everyone else is.[/QUOTE]

    Well I guess you're going to hear every butt joke there is. Having been in the medical field for 28 years---seeing naked butts is no big deal to medical people. We zero in on the problem and often get too focused on it to where the patient may be ignored and just thought of as the sore, or the surgery or so forth. In fact, sometimes we don't recognize a person we treated but we recognize the injury when described.
     
  10. withwonderingawe

    withwonderingawe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +505
    Mormon
    Married
    US-Republican
    Yes, I know. That is exactly what I said. He had it divided and numbered exactly the same way that the KJV has it divided. And it is word for word the KJV, including the punctuation.[/QUOTE]


    Two months is a long time, glad you recovered.

    The point is when Joseph was translating he had no Bible or anything in front of him except that rock in his hat. He would start reading and Oliver would start writing. There were no paragraphs, no chapters.

    Nephi says he loves the scriptures and likens them to themselves. He then starts in quoting Isaiah 2, why 2 and not 1. Well 1 has to do with Jerusalem and its destruction and they arent living there. He picks 2 because its about a new temple being raised in the latter days, in the tops of the mountians above the hills. Highest peak in Israel is 7,300" thats a hill, heck I live at 4,000". The highest in Utah is over 13,000 now that's a mountain. We feel Isa. 2 has been full filled with the building of the Temple in Salt Lake and that's why Nephi put it in there.

    As Joseph dictates to Oliver he does not say Isaiah chapter 2, verse 1. He just starts quoting it, in fact all of his quoting is in one chapter, chapter 8 of 2 Nephi of the 1830 edition. There's no numbering at all. I do not know when the Church decided to break it up to fit the JKV chapters and verses.

    We do not have his original manuscript for this portion, were the italicized words in there or were they added in later?

    We do know the word 'her' was in the KJV, for Isa 9:1 but not in the Book of Mormon nor the original Hebrew text it came from. And there is a good explaintion for the Red Sea, it's part of the high way system called the Kings highway which ran from Egypt to north of Jerusalem. This is really a proof of the Book of Mormon.
     
  11. Phoebe Ann

    Phoebe Ann From Mormonism to Christ Supporter

    +8,211
    United States
    Protestant
    Widowed
    That's not funny. I'm very sorry it happened that way.
     
  12. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others

    Two months is a long time, glad you recovered.

    The point is when Joseph was translating he had no Bible or anything in front of him except that rock in his hat. He would start reading and Oliver would start writing. There were no paragraphs, no chapters.

    Nephi says he loves the scriptures and likens them to themselves. He then starts in quoting Isaiah 2, why 2 and not 1. Well 1 has to do with Jerusalem and its destruction and they arent living there. He picks 2 because its about a new temple being raised in the latter days, in the tops of the mountians above the hills. Highest peak in Israel is 7,300" thats a hill, heck I live at 4,000". The highest in Utah is over 13,000 now that's a mountain. We feel Isa. 2 has been full filled with the building of the Temple in Salt Lake and that's why Nephi put it in there.

    As Joseph dictates to Oliver he does not say Isaiah chapter 2, verse 1. He just starts quoting it, in fact all of his quoting is in one chapter, chapter 8 of 2 Nephi of the 1830 edition. There's no numbering at all. I do not know when the Church decided to break it up to fit the JKV chapters and verses.

    We do not have his original manuscript for this portion, were the italicized words in there or were they added in later?

    We do know the word 'her' was in the KJV, for Isa 9:1 but not in the Book of Mormon nor the original Hebrew text it came from. And there is a good explaintion for the Red Sea, it's part of the high way system called the Kings highway which ran from Egypt to north of Jerusalem. This is really a proof of the Book of Mormon.[/QUOTE]


    You say he dictated and Oliver wrote----JS dictated the very same errors that appeared 1,200 years later in the KJV??!


    Malachi 3:10 (KJV) 3 Nephi 24:10
    [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
    Malachi 3:10 KJV
    [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
    3 Nephi 24:10
    In this example, the KJV added seven words not found in the source Hebrew manuscripts to its English translation. The Book of Mormon, which was allegedly completed 1,200 years prior, contains the identical seven words.
    • KJV translation errors
      Our understanding of the Hebrew language today is much more advanced than it was in the 1600's when King James authorized an english translation of the Bible. Somehow the divine process guiding Joseph's "translation" of the Book of Mormon didn't prevent him from making identical translation errors.
     
  13. withwonderingawe

    withwonderingawe Well-Known Member Supporter

    +505
    Mormon
    Married
    US-Republican
    Funny you should bring up 2nephi 12:16. Once again it's one of those strange little twist.

    And upon all the ships of the sea, and upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all the pleasant pictures.

    The Septuagint has the phrase 'ships of the sea'. The Hebrew has 'ships of Tarshish' showing that the brass plates which Nephi was quoting from had not lost either phrase. Joseph didn't have a Septuagint.
     
  14. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    He used the word pictures---same as the KJV--should have been crafts or vessels. And you skip over the fact he used the same 7 words that are not in the original but only in the KJV; n Question is---why does he dictate the same errors that appear in the KJV, but not in the original. It is obvious he did not have a Septugint, he is quoting the KJV.
     
  15. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    No one but JS saw the translating stones at work. Supposedly Oliver only wrote as JS dictated. So nobody knows what JS was quoting---some tablet that the angel took to heaven, or--pretty obviously, just dictating mostly the KJV. Nothing is available to see of this tablet so nothing can be verified. Strange that this tablet keeps making the same errors that the KJV makes.
     
  16. Peter1000

    Peter1000 Well-Known Member

    +334
    Mormon
    Married
    mmksparbud says,
    You say he dictated and Oliver wrote----JS dictated the very same errors that appeared 1,200 years later in the KJV??!


    Malachi 3:10 (KJV) 3 Nephi 24:10
    [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
    Malachi 3:10 KJV
    [​IMG] ...and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
    3 Nephi 24:10
    In this example, the KJV added seven words not found in the source Hebrew manuscripts to its English translation. The Book of Mormon, which was allegedly completed 1,200 years prior, contains the identical seven words.
    • KJV translation errors
      Our understanding of the Hebrew language today is much more advanced than it was in the 1600's when King James authorized an english translation of the Bible. Somehow the divine process guiding Joseph's "translation" of the Book of Mormon didn't prevent him from making identical translation errors.
    [/QUOTE]

    __________________________________________________________
    So what did the source Hebrew manuscripts say Malachi 3:10 said??? If you don't add the 7 words, this is what it would say: "And pour you out a blessing that not enough". Is that what the source Hebrew manuscripts say???? If so, it says nothing.

    So it looks like that the KJV translators must have been moved by the HS to translate it correctly, and so did JS.
     
  17. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    __________________________________________________________
    So what did the source Hebrew manuscripts say Malachi 3:10 said??? If you don't add the 7 words, this is what it would say: "And pour you out a blessing that not enough". Is that what the source Hebrew manuscripts say???? If so, it says nothing.

    So it looks like that the KJV translators must have been moved by the HS to translate it correctly, and so did JS.[/QUOTE]



    :doh::sigh: You have never read any ancient Hebrew have you?

    and pour you out Verb
    lā-ḵem לָכֶ֛ם to Prep
    1293 [e] bə-rā-ḵāh בְּרָכָ֖ה a blessing Noun
    5704 [e] ‘aḏ- עַד־ that Prep
    1097 [e] bə-lî- בְּלִי־ not Subst
    1767 [e] ḏāy. דָֽי׃ [be room] enough Prep


    If the Holy Spirit translated that correctly in KJV----then the whole bible was translated accurately and there is no need for JS. But then according to you guys---the Holy Spirit only works hit and miss---sometimes it's accurate and sometimes it is not and only JS can tell the difference.
    I get the distinct impression that if you were not a Mormon, you would be a die hard Scientologist.
     
  18. Peter1000

    Peter1000 Well-Known Member

    +334
    Mormon
    Married
    mmksparbud,

    So the ancient Hebrew says,"and pour you out to a blessing that not [be room] enough".

    I don't read ancient Hebrew like you apparently do, but this does not sound like a very intelligent sentence.

    So the question is: did the KJV translate it correctly?[/QUOTE]
     
  19. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,686
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    [/QUOTE]

    • No the question is---Why does JS have so many passages that are exactly the same as KJV.
     
  20. Peter1000

    Peter1000 Well-Known Member

    +334
    Mormon
    Married
    • No the question is---Why does JS have so many passages that are exactly the same as KJV.
    [/QUOTE]
    Is the JS translation of the Isaiah chapters and the words of Malachi exactly the same as the KJV?

    I want you to think about this concept: If JS was told to translate an ancient record, but part of that record was some words of Isaiah and Malachi, why would the Lord not instruct JS to use the existing KJV? This would reduce the work of translation for that part of the record.

    JS does not say that he was instructed to do this, and the words are quite close, but not exactly the same, so I don't know that this happened, but if the KJV was as good a translation as the brass plates were, then JS could have just used that portion of the KJV and save translation time. That makes sense to me.

    Translators of the bible use as ancient a text(s) as they can get their hands on, but they also have other more current translations that they refer to, probably to make sure they are close in their translation if not exactly the same in many many cases, especially chapter and verse.
     
Loading...