To All former Evangelicals/Protestants

[rameumptom]

No, for the Bible to be 90% inspired means God has been active in preventing Satan and man from destroying it. But it also allows God to give mankind their agency and free will, an allowance to make mistakes. Peter can deny Christ 3 times, and still be acceptable as an apostle. Jonah can run away, and still be an acceptable prophet to Nineveh. Jeremiah can tell the Jewish leaders that they have intentionally rewritten the holy words in their day, and yet we can still have an inspired Bible.

The evidences are just so major in showing the Bible is not the perfect word of God. At the same time, it is an amazing set of writings that show God's inspiration.

Otherwise, if we insist it is perfect, then one anomaly should knock the entire book over and prove it wrong. Read "Jesus, Interrupted" by Bart Ehrman, and you'll find several conflicts in the New Testament alone. Moses proclaimed his law to be an "everlasting covenant", yet Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law. Which is it? If the Bible is perfect, how can the Mosaic Law be an everlasting covenant AND fulfilled at the same time?

God's words ARE pure. But they are changed as they are rewritten by mankind. If the Bible is perfect and the Mosaic Law IS an everlasting covenant, then may I ask if you've been circumcised and provided animal sacrifices to your local Levite priest? Do you abstain from pork and lobster? Do you celebrate the Jewish festivals and rites?

It is like shooting fish in a barrel, and yet the fish still swim to the top thinking there's more water to go to....

[Galatians220]

No, for the Bible to be 90% inspired means God has been active in preventing Satan and man from destroying it. But it also allows God to give mankind their agency and free will, an allowance to make mistakes. Peter can deny Christ 3 times, and still be acceptable as an apostle. Jonah can run away, and still be an acceptable prophet to Nineveh. Jeremiah can tell the Jewish leaders that they have intentionally rewritten the holy words in their day, and yet we can still have an inspired Bible.

Wait a minute, where in Psalms 12:6, and Proverbs 22:12, 19-21 says that He only prevents Satan from corrupting his words? The freedom to commit sin in a Christian's life does not apply to the preservation of Scripture. Again, let me show you the scripture again:

6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. - Psalm 12:6

12 The eyes of the LORD preserve knowledge, and he overthroweth the words of the transgressor.
19 That thy trust may be in the LORD, I have made known to thee this day, even to thee.
20 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge,
21 That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee? - Proverbs 22:12, 19-21

Where on earth did it say that He will only protect His word from Satan but will allow man to corrupt it?

The evidences are just so major in showing the Bible is not the perfect word of God. At the same time, it is an amazing set of writings that show God's inspiration.

Sounds like God half-heartedly kept His words pure. You said before that 90% is inspired yet here, the evidence is major. You know he scripture, so tell me, how majorly did God messed up?

Otherwise, if we insist it is perfect, then one anomaly should knock the entire book over and prove it wrong. Read "Jesus, Interrupted" by Bart Ehrman, and you'll find several conflicts in the New Testament alone. Moses proclaimed his law to be an "everlasting covenant", yet Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law. Which is it? If the Bible is perfect, how can the Mosaic Law be an everlasting covenant AND fulfilled at the same time?

That's right, one error can do God over. I don't have that much time to read them so bring it on. I think the reason there are so many, so called conflicts in scripture is that they didn't try hard enough to solve those problem in the first place. As you have already seen, I've pretty much answered every single one of those problems.

God's words ARE pure. But they are changed as they are rewritten by mankind. If the Bible is perfect and the Mosaic Law IS an everlasting covenant, then may I ask if you've been circumcised and provided animal sacrifices to your local Levite priest? Do you abstain from pork and lobster? Do you celebrate the Jewish festivals and rites?

It is like shooting fish in a barrel, and yet the fish still swim to the top thinking there's more water to go to....

That, "everlasting covenant" is ONLY applied for the Jewish people:

7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. - Deuteronomy 17:7-8

Much of the Mosaic Law is ceremonial for which the Jews are tasked to follow that relates to the Sabbath, the temple, the sacrifices, etc and not just the 10 moral commandments. Thye are not tasked in doing this simply because He wants them to, but because they are the chosen people above ALL people.

6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. - Ibid 7:6

Therefore, the ceremonials, the temple worship, the animal sacrifices etc does NOT apply to them. Furthermore, God made the Law not just to make people right before him:

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. - Romans 3:19-20


On Circumcision:
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses....
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? - Acts 17:5-10

On the Sabbath, festavels, and temple rite:
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: - Colossians 2:14-16

And finally, the Moral Law itself
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. - Deuteronomy 18:18

"...Like unto Thee..." Moses is the Lawgiver, not just a Prophet. therefore, one who is coming will be like Moses but better - that's Jesus

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. - Mattehw 5:17-18
(John 19:30 - It is finished!)

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
...
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: - Galatians 3:10-13

17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. - John 1:17


Jesus came to fulfill the Law of Moses and then dying to it; He is the Final sacrifice (Hebrews 10:10), the end of the Law for Righteousness (Romans 10:2-4).

[rameumptom]

I am looking at facts. Jeremiah accused the temple priests of doctoring the scriptures. The Johannine Comma is perfect proof of the New Testament being adulterated centuries later by a Christian priest who wanted to put more evidence of the Trinity into the Bible. It is still in the KJV, but removed from other newer Bibles. Which Bible, then, is "more perfect", the one with the Johannine Comma, or the one without? Was the Christian priest, NOT a prophet or apostle, called of God to change the writings of the apostle John? If so, how do you know? And if he was, why are so many Bibles removing it today?

Ignore this 800 lb gorilla if you wish, but it still is in the room. The Bible is not perfect. How then does God preserve his word?

Through modern apostles and prophets. God reveals his secrets through prophets (Amos 3:7). God gives apostles and prophets, so we are not tossed to and fro by winds of false doctrines (Eph 4:11-14). And the foundation of the gospel is apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20) and NOT the Bible. If you want the word of God preserved, it will not be in a sealed book, as the Bible is. It will be in living words revealed to modern prophets.

[Galatians220]

Originally Posted by rameumptom

I am looking at facts. Jeremiah accused the temple priests of doctoring the scriptures. The Johannine Comma is perfect proof of the New Testament being adulterated centuries later by a Christian priest who wanted to put more evidence of the Trinity into the Bible. It is still in the KJV, but removed from other newer Bibles. Which Bible, then, is "more perfect", the one with the Johannine Comma, or the one without? Was the Christian priest, NOT a prophet or apostle, called of God to change the writings of the apostle John? If so, how do you know? And if he was, why are so many Bibles removing it today?

Ignore this 800 lb gorilla if you wish, but it still is in the room. The Bible is not perfect. How then does God preserve his word?

Through modern apostles and prophets. God reveals his secrets through prophets (Amos 3:7). God gives apostles and prophets, so we are not tossed to and fro by winds of false doctrines (Eph 4:11-14). And the foundation of the gospel is apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20) and NOT the Bible. If you want the word of God preserved, it will not be in a sealed book, as the Bible is. It will be in living words revealed to modern prophets.

While I still agree that those scribes tried and did, as well as those teachers, their writing has never made it to the Word of God and has never been considered inspired if it did. The extra-biblical writings has been inside the Bible, it was never considered inspired by the Jews nor the Christians until the Reformation.


1 John 5:7 is actually supported by the Byzantine Text (Majority Text) which is the largest body the collection of scripture and it shows 1 John 5:7.

The reason why most modern translations have not 1 John 5:7 is because all of them is based on the Alexandrian Text which is the oldest text found (2nd Century).

I would liken the Alexandrian to a rough draft not that it has all of these grammar errors that needs revision, but because it is simple, and at that time, the people of that time does not have a lot of paper as we do today (not to mention the fact that they are under persecution which made the availability of paper difficult). So no space is wasted and when you look at the actual text, it doesn't have verse numbers, capitol letters, and titles on them.

The King James Only movement believes that the New versions of the Bibles are false because of the alleged deliberate omissions of certain words in texts. For example:

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. - John 6:47 KJV

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.
- Jhn 6:47 - NASB and others
John 6 (Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)


4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. - Luke 4:4 KJV


And Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE.' " - Luke 4:4 NASB and others
Luke 4:4 NASB and others
(Blue Letter Bible: KJV - King James Version)


Some alleged omissions are the details such as this, and some are quite glaring. In Revelations 1:8 and 11, the modern versions only has one, Alpha and Omega and that is only to God. They don't have verse 11.


If they are right, the devil in his ability to deceive, omitted the key wordings of scripture to blunt the power of it's message and to be honest, it is not that hard to see that. The King James Bible has been in the hands of believers ever since it's been distributed in the 16th century so for 3 1/2 centuries, it has been the dominant text of truth and then the discovery of the Alexandrian.

While the text itself does not give false information, the omissions themselves have raised a lot of eyebrows including mine. To be honest, the Byzantine Text does not have all the details either but not as much, and as far as I know, there's not a full verse omission, just the details. Here's a site that displayed most of these alleged omissions: Various Contradictions and Omissions

Today, bibles are being produced for the sake of easy reading so you have the literal, "word-for-word" versions (NASB, RSV, YLT), and then increasingly, the "thought-for-thought" versions (NLT, LB, CEV) and unfortunately, those "Thought-for-thought" bibles are nothing more than paraphrases, they are NOT inspired.

There is already a Bible that is Gender-Neutral, the Holman Christian Standard Bible in order to make it a friendly Bible for everyone by changing "mankind," or "He" to a more neutral kind. And this is not the first time a Bible is produced to fit a belief system. The Jehovah's Witnesses have made their own Bible, the New World Translation which deliberately changed, adding words, and twisted clear Trinitarian verses:

Ex:
1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. - John 1:1

6 But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: “And let all God’s angels do obeisance to him.”4 - Hebrews 1:6

The Bible as you know does NOT have the letter "a" in the passage and that the word "Obeisance" was deliberately in place of "Worship."


You want to use the Coma, go ahead but remember.... there is a much larger body of text that supports my argument. And if you are going to use these troubling facts on new bible versions as further proof of the bible not 100% perfect, then let me tell you that there is a difference between altering Bible messages already made and erroneous bibles produced.

Like the extra-biblical books such as Tobit, and Maccabees 1-4, Satan can produce false Bibles to further cause doubt on the Word of God. His strategy is to sow seeds of doubt and though they are small, if there is enough of them will add up to cause doubt. I can see that he did a good job on you already because you are not so trusting in the Bible but more inclined to trust in the Prophets than God's Word.

Mind you, Jesus did not use His authority to defeat Satan, but He used the Word of God. While we should all listen to our prophets, they should not replace the Word of God nor hold greater importance. The Bereans have received Paul warmly, but they have checked the Word of God to see if Paul, the most important Apostle is telling the truth, That is why they are more Noble than the Thessalonians.

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by Galatians220

My intentions here are clearly stated above. I am here to learn, but also to learn from former evangelicans and protestants who converted. here, I am answering or clarifying certain teaching she did not understand. She is not a Mormon. However, I have gone a bit far on salvation.

If I am here to convert her, I would have used scripture to back myself up in this but i've stated only what I believed. And if I am here just to debate the LDS and convert them, I would have started a thread and placed my argument for them to answer.

Please know that I will only debate if someone fired the first shot, and then I will naturally return fire but in a respectful way.

So much for:

I am here to learn from you, on why you believed that the Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true and I feel that there is no better group or place to ask than here.

I am an ex-Mormon atheist, so it doesn't matter to me who "wins" the discussion. I just get irritated at the disinegenuousness. You're not asking questions to learn from the Mormons here. You're answering questions to mock their Mormonism, hoping we won't notice.

Elphaba

[Galatians220]

Originally Posted by Elphaba

So much for:
I am an ex-Mormon atheist, so it doesn't matter to me who "wins" the discussion. I just get irritated at the disinegenuousness. You're not asking questions to learn from the Mormons here. You're answering questions to mock their Mormonism, hoping we won't notice.

Elphaba

How am I mocking Mormonism here? Now if your referring to the debate that is going on here, I didn't start it. Please look back and see if I jumped at any Mormon here.

[jadams_4040]

Originally Posted by Galatians220

Before I post my question my coming here is for my learning about the LDS Church. I began my search when I met an LDS in class and from then on I attended on Sundays going on all three classes (Communion, Doctrines, and Mens) for six months. I wanted to learn from the LDS thenselves instead of learning only from the Apologist themselves.

I've ended my visits because of a lack of time, church priorities, but also learning enough to know that, unfortunately have more disagreements with the LDS doctrine than agree. However, I have promised my friend to continue reading the Book of Mormon so that the Spirit can enlighten me on things that may confirm the truth you all believed in, and I will keep that promise.



I am here to learn from you, on why you believed that the Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true and I feel that there is no better group or place to ask than here. I want to talk to those who use to believe in:

1. The Word of God being the primary source of Truth.
2. The Trinity (One God in 3 persons opp. to personages)
3. In Salvation by Faith Alone (as well as Eternal Security, "Once Saved, Always Saved")

I want most especially to talk to those who have read the Bible for many years as an Evangelical/Protestant and if any, those who have experiences and learning in Apologetics, defending the 3 fundamental doctrines above. My primary question to you is this:

What argument most convinced you from the Word of God, to change from believing in these fundamentals to believing just the opposite of them?

This is pretty much the last part of my learning about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. apart from the Book of Mormon. I look forward to reading all of your feedbacks.

God bless

we pretty much rely on the spirit for knowledge; not what some angry confrontational gathering of self proclaimed religeous leaders put together in 350 A.D.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Galatians220

Evangelical and Protestant Churches, particularly the fundamentalist does not believe in that part of the Chicago Statement; the question in my mind is whether he has always believed that or has he been convinced that the Bible can have inconsistencies due to human influence.

From my reading, and understanding, if any inconsistancy is found in scripture, then God's Word is not inspired. See my Statement of Faith submission on my profile

I read the bible, history, archaeology and Near eastern languages before and without any defined theological or religious affiliation. I am, for the most part, a social scientist and I am not impressed by philosophical abstractions, insights developed from circular reasoning or the theological bends or traditions of many religious celebrities. I can read and research on my own as well as the next.

Most Evangelicals I have discussed the subject with bring to the conversation a standpoint gained from training and indoctrination received. Acceptance and adherence to such and a total disregard for a divergent opinion clouds and interferes with any true genuine exchange. In other words, most come to the conversation with their minds made up and ready for an argument.

The Scriptures as we know them, inspired as they may be were not meant to be what they are today. The NT, for example, was NOT meant to be the WHOLE and ultimate word of God. Beyond the Gospels account, what we have is a collection of surviving letter of the hundreds that may have existed, between co-religioners addressing specific problems and issues among geographically dispersed congregations. To claim that such is the FULL extent of the word of God seems naive, especially when God Himself did not say such a thing.

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by Galatians220

How am I mocking Mormonism here? Now if your referring to the debate that is going on here, I didn't start it. Please look back and see if I jumped at any Mormon here.

It doesn't matter who started it. You continued it.

If you were interested in learning about Mormonism, and why the members believe in it, as was your stated intention, you wouldn't be debating it. You'd be listening, and accepting what they tell you they believe.

I suppose this is a moot point in that some of the members here are happy to debate you, so I'll back off now.

Elphaba

[Just_A_Guy]

Originally Posted by Elphaba

It doesn't matter who started it. You continued it.

And so help me, if I have to pull this discussion thread over you two are walking all the way home!