And Jesus Said Unto Them, "And Whom Do You Say That I Am?"

[Gameface]

There is no right and wrong if it is relative.

There is only lawful or unlawful.

My argument is that first off there is no God, so no divine being established universal morality. Yet, you believe in a certain and undeniable moral code. So, where did that moral code come from? It came from humans and is based on reason. That's the only place it has ever come from and the only place it can come from. God did not stop us from living by the law of the jungle, we decided we liked it better being "civilized" and abiding by a common notion of morality.

When we discuss moral principles we do not just say "God said so" even though theists acknowledge that they cannot know the mind of God. So why don't we just say that we do what God says no matter what? Because we are rational, intelligent beings who interact with our world primarily through our mind. It is the human mind that shaped your reality...even the idea that a supreme being, the father of all fathers, exists. You moral code is glorious...and is the product of simple human thought.

I'm sure you're aware that modern Christians ignore, completely ignore and disregard moral concepts that were held near and dear to your faith as the word of God only a very short time ago. Why? Because the **** didn't make sense so it was rejected. Humans don't engage in nonsense, especially nonsense that isn't useful to our rational desires.

 

[Hantlers]

I have a question for the LDSers here that I've never really had answered before. Which book do you value more, The Bible or the Book of Mormon?

 

[Stoked]

I have a question for the LDSers here that I've never really had answered before. Which book do you value more, The Bible or the Book of Mormon?

They are equal. However there is a favortism towards the Book of Mormon in the sense that it is used more.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I have a question for the LDSers here that I've never really had answered before. Which book do you value more, The Bible or the Book of Mormon?

This is my take on the question.
That's like asking if you value your right hand or your left hand more. They are both valued together though they both add something different to our vision of who God is, and who Christ is, and "everything else" involved in the whole equation. I sometimes think of them as two different windows into heaven, we don't get the same angle and don't see the same exact things because the windows are on different walls of the house, but they both look out into the same "place"... so to speak.
I value the Book of Mormon immensely for more reasons than I could possibly name in a post, and yet my favorite book of scripture is the New Testament, especially the 4 Gospels. There is just something about the books that specifically deal with the life of Christ that "speaks to me" and grabs my attention just a bit more than other scripture even though I enjoy them as well.

Does this help answer your question?

 

[DutchJazzer]

I heard jesus was a jew, but jesus isnt a jewish name, but a mexican. so why would a jew name his son a mexican name.
one confused jew.
as the greattbag would say: boy you are confused about your pigementation

 

[DutchJazzer]

Chuck Norris

Chuck noris SUCKS.

there i SAID it.

and yes i'm sitll alive. wish he'd come to my door.
let me pull of his wig

 

[Hantlers]

This is my take on the question.
That's like asking if you value your right hand or your left hand more. They are both valued together though they both add something different to our vision of who God is, and who Christ is, and "everything else" involved in the whole equation. I sometimes think of them as two different windows into heaven, we don't get the same angle and don't see the same exact things because the windows are on different walls of the house, but they both look out into the same "place"... so to speak.
I value the Book of Mormon immensely for more reasons than I could possibly name in a post, and yet my favorite book of scripture is the New Testament, especially the 4 Gospels. There is just something about the books that specifically deal with the life of Christ that "speaks to me" and grabs my attention just a bit more than other scripture even though I enjoy them as well.

Does this help answer your question?

Thanks, much appreciated.

My question upon this would be how do you respond to where it says in the Bible that "anybody who takes or adds away from this book will have all the plagues added to them" (rough translation from memory). Couldn't somebody say that holding another book in equal value with the Bible is adding to that book?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

They are equal. However there is a favortism towards the Book of Mormon in the sense that it is used more.

There are some quotes from prophets, specifically Joseph Smith who said the Book of Mormon "is the most correct book on Earth, and the keystone of our religion and that a man would come closer to God by abiding by it's precepts than by any other book". The 8th Article of Faith written by Joseph Smith states "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God."
My understanding is that the Book of Mormon was translated one time from the plates, so we see it in a "more correct" form than what it took for us to get the Bible as we know it today. There is still much controversy regarding the translations of the Bible.

Ezekiel 37:15-17:

And the word of the Lord came to me, saying: And you, son of man, take one stick, and write upon it: For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions; then take another stick, and write upon it: For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions; and join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand.

To LDS members, this scripture outlines the "stick of Judah" (Bible), and "stick of Joseph" as one in your hand. The Book of Mormon is considered to be the stick of Joseph as it was the descendents of Joseph whose history is outlined in the Book of Mormon.

Despite all of this we devote much time to study and learning the Bible. Personally I still don't believe most LDS members spend enough time in the Bible, and are missing many important gems.

 

[Hantlers]

There are some quotes from prophets, specifically Joseph Smith who said the Book of Mormon "is the most correct book on Earth, and the keystone of our religion and that a man would come closer to God by abiding by it's precepts than by any other book". The 8th Article of Faith written by Joseph Smith states "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God."
My understanding is that the Book of Mormon was translated one time from the plates, so we see it in a "more correct" form than what it took for us to get the Bible as we know it today. There is still much controversy regarding the translations of the Bible.



To LDS members, this scripture outlines the "stick of Judah" (Bible), and "stick of Joseph" as one in your hand. The Book of Mormon is considered to be the stick of Joseph as it was the descendents of Joseph whose history is outlined in the Book of Mormon.

Despite all of this we devote much time to study and learning the Bible. Personally I still don't believe most LDS members spend enough time in the Bible, and are missing many important gems.

Very interesting, thanks Spazz. I don't want it to seem like I'm arguing with you, I just don't know a lot about the LDS faith. However in regards to what I've bolded, a common argument I've heard is that the Book of Mormon contains many of the same translation errors that the King James Bible had during the same period...is there any backbone to that or not?

Here's a link I found on the subject, fount it interesting.

https://www.infidels.org/library/modern/curt_heuvel/bom_kjv.html

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Thanks, much appreciated.

My question upon this would be how do you respond to where it says in the Bible that "anybody who takes or adds away from this book will have all the plagues added to them" (rough translation from memory). Couldn't somebody say that holding another book in equal value with the Bible is adding to that book?

It says that or something similar in a few places. The two I can think of are in the book of Revelations, and the book of Deuteronomy. Revelations was written chronologically before some other books in the New Testament, and most books in the Bible were written after Deuteronomy. The Bible as we see it did not even exist as it is currently constructed when it was written. The words of Christ or even Jehovah have said similar things in numerous places, something similar is said in the Book of Mormon as well, but with different wording. So if you take the line that you can't add to the book, the Bible should stop at Deuteronomy. Or if you want to single out the New Testament, you have to realize that other books included in the Bible were written after the book of Revelations, would that be adding to the book?

I also personally think those words were added as a warning to those that would copy or translate those words, so they would know if they intentionally messed with them to take away or to add to them that they would be asking for trouble.

My understanding is this. Jesus Christ has given us his gospel, and that is what we should live, and teach. If we teach less than or more than his Gospel, then we are not teaching his Gospel. In my opinion it is saying we need to teach what he taught, and live how he said we should live and not do our own version of it.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Very interesting, thanks Spazz. I don't want it to seem like I'm arguing with you, I just don't know a lot about the LDS faith. However in regards to what I've bolded, a common argument I've heard is that the Book of Mormon contains many of the same translation errors that the King James Bible had during the same period...is there any backbone to that or not?

Here's a link I found on the subject, fount it interesting.

https://www.infidels.org/library/modern/curt_heuvel/bom_kjv.html

In my opinion there is no backbone at all.
This website, while interesting, is comparing the Book of Mormon which has had only spelling and grammar changes made to it to the Bible which has been written, copied, translated, copied some more, and after many stages of this we are digging into whatever copies we have available and using that as the standard for how The Book of Mormon should be?
Apples to Oranges here, but yes it is interesting and fun to look at.

 

[franklin]

My question upon this would be how do you respond to where it says in the Bible that "anybody who takes or adds away from this book will have all the plagues added to them" (rough translation from memory). Couldn't somebody say that holding another book in equal value with the Bible is adding to that book?

That interpretation is myth of pure evangelical stupidity (no offense intended but that's the truth). Early Catholics compiled the bible in the 4th century and added every other book to your Book of Revelations with it's warning. If you're using it to mean anything other than the Book of Revelations then you're throwing the rest of the bible out. Then you're ****ed because you don't have the original manuscript and many variations inside Revelations are well known.

That warning was commonly added due to the procedure of the day. Guy a writes manuscript and gives it to guy b, who takes it to guy c to read, copy and send on to guy d, who is 400 miles away. The warning was added to many religious and secular writings around the early first century a.d. (and had a prior history as Spazz noted) because authoritative writings were often altered without immediate consequence (you don't easily discredit everyone 2, 3, 400 miles away claiming to have your original writing). After all, it was the age of false christ's galore. Everyone and their dog wanted to lead those gullible Jews out into the desert.

 

[franklin]

In my opinion there is no backbone at all.
This website, while interesting, is comparing the Book of Mormon which has had only spelling and grammar changes made to it to the Bible which has been written, copied, translated, copied some more, and after many stages of this we are digging into whatever copies we have available and using that as the standard for how The Book of Mormon should be?
Apples to Oranges here, but yes it is interesting and fun to look at.

I think Hantler's is asking why translation errors in the KJV also made there way into the BofM. I don't find that troublesome at all as the passages in question were translated to meet the known scripture of the day. The belief in modern interpretation takes care of the errors, just as the Catholics now update their bible to reflect the most up-to-date corrections.

 

[PearlWatson]

My argument is that first off there is no God, so no divine being established universal morality. Yet, you believe in a certain and undeniable moral code. So, where did that moral code come from?[/B] It came from humans and is based on reason. That's the only place it has ever come from and the only place it can come from. God did not stop us from living by the law of the jungle, we decided we liked it better being "civilized" and abiding by a common notion of morality.

When we discuss moral principles we do not just say "God said so" even though theists acknowledge that they cannot know the mind of God. So why don't we just say that we do what God says no matter what? Because we are rational, intelligent beings who interact with our world primarily through our mind. It is the human mind that shaped your reality...even the idea that a supreme being, the father of all fathers, exists. You moral code is glorious...and is the product of simple human thought.

I'm sure you're aware that modern Christians ignore, completely ignore and disregard moral concepts that were held near and dear to your faith as the word of God only a very short time ago. Why? Because the **** didn't make sense so it was rejected. Humans don't engage in nonsense, especially nonsense that isn't useful to our rational desires.

That bolded thought was pretty amusing.

Where did "our common notion of morality" come from? The majority of America has Judeo/Christian morals. Originating from the written moral code of the ten commandments, the NT and such as.

Of course there are all kinds of other ethics people draw from. Some more dangerously "reasoned" than others.

 

[The Black Swordsman]

I like the book of Mormon more. It has a masterpiece of a verse 2 Nephri 5:21

"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."

I also do like the Bible with my favorite verse Ezekiel 23:20
"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses"

Also Qur'an 5:31

"...whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind... "

 

[Hantlers]

I think Hantler's is asking why translation errors in the KJV also made there way into the BofM. I don't find that troublesome at all as the passages in question were translated to meet the known scripture of the day. The belief in modern interpretation takes care of the errors, just as the Catholics now update their bible to reflect the most up-to-date corrections.

That is what I meant. Sorry if I worded it poorly.

Anyways, thanks to Franklin and especially to Spazz for answering my questions. Much appreciated. Both of you will be repped accordingly.

 

[TroutBum]

I prefer the Bible for the same reason I enjoy The Silmarillion, LOTR, etc. It is entertaining, thought provoking, and very much fictional. I've never read the BoM, so I can't say too much other than I've attempted to read it probably a dozen times in my life -- I just can't stand it. /shrug

 

[GVC]

I prefer the Bible for the same reason I enjoy The Silmarillion, LOTR, etc. It is entertaining, thought provoking, and very much fictional. I've never read the BoM, so I can't say too much other than I've attempted to read it probably a dozen times in my life -- I just can't stand it. /shrug

wtf?

 

[PearlWatson]

I like the book of Mormon more. It has a masterpiece of a verse 2 Nephri 5:21

"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."

I also do like the Bible with my favorite verse Ezekiel 23:20
"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses"

Also Qur'an 5:31

"...whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind... "

I like Ecclesiastes 10:2

“The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”

 

[TroutBum]

I like Ecclesiastes 10:2

“The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”

I like TroutBum, 69:96

"And so it came to pass, a loathsome Scourge was set upon the board, and the masses did wail, and did gnash their teeth, and did pound their chests. And behold the Scourge was liken unto foulest of Gordon's creations. Undesirable, uncouth, and blacker than the darkest beasts of the Earth, even unto the dark places of the Earth where the light of day cannot penetrate. And lo, the Scourge hath many faces and doth travel and speak with the voice and tongues of many people. And the Scourge did harken to the Moderating staff, and thus, being feeble minded, they were deceived."

I hope Gordon decides to translate your *** straight to the pits of Na'ar, Slopper. He sees you for what you are.