Comments on: Change(s) in The Book of Mormon Introduction http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/ Sun, 23 Mar 2008 19:40:57 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: David Grua http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-346 David Grua Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:49:31 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-346 UPDATE: For those who have not been following the discussion over at the other <a href="http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/comparing-the-1981-2004-and-2006-book-of-mormon-introductions/" rel="nofollow">thread</a>, we now know that the phrase "as does the Bible" was removed at least as early as 1992 in the Spanish language print editions of the Book of Mormon. Although the phrase survives in the lds.org electronic English edition, it is not in the Spanish language edition. UPDATE: For those who have not been following the discussion over at the other thread, we now know that the phrase “as does the Bible” was removed at least as early as 1992 in the Spanish language print editions of the Book of Mormon. Although the phrase survives in the lds.org electronic English edition, it is not in the Spanish language edition.

]]> By: California Condor http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-342 California Condor Sat, 10 Nov 2007 00:07:48 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-342 Point, We believe at the end of the day the Holy Ghost will inspire you to do what's right. Point,

We believe at the end of the day the Holy Ghost will inspire you to do what’s right.

]]> By: Christopher http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-341 Christopher Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:22:57 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-341 Point, Thanks for stopping by. The questions you bring up are important, but as the aim of this blog is to discuss Mormonism in historical context(s), and not to engage in either apologia or criticism of the institutional church, they are perhaps more appropriate in other venues. A couple other notes: FARMS doesn't represent all Mormons, and though I can't speak for all bloggers here (though I assume most would agree with me), FARMS certainly doesn't represent my approach to Mormonism. It is unfair and inaccurate to point to "defenses Mormon offer" as if there was consensus among Mormons regarding how to respond to perceived attacks on the LDS Church. I, for one, choose to not make it a habit to respond to such attacks at all. Point,
Thanks for stopping by. The questions you bring up are important, but as the aim of this blog is to discuss Mormonism in historical context(s), and not to engage in either apologia or criticism of the institutional church, they are perhaps more appropriate in other venues.

A couple other notes: FARMS doesn’t represent all Mormons, and though I can’t speak for all bloggers here (though I assume most would agree with me), FARMS certainly doesn’t represent my approach to Mormonism. It is unfair and inaccurate to point to “defenses Mormon offer” as if there was consensus among Mormons regarding how to respond to perceived attacks on the LDS Church. I, for one, choose to not make it a habit to respond to such attacks at all.

]]> By: bfwebster http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-340 bfwebster Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:56:03 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-340 <blockquote>I will continue to unravel.</blockquote> Well, ok, if you <em>really want to</em>.... :-) ..bruce..

I will continue to unravel.

Well, ok, if you really want to…. :-) ..bruce..

]]> By: Point http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-339 Point Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:46:18 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-339 This wording change is one of thousands of examples of how so-called "Anti-Mormons" are going to great lengths to research, document, and publicize the faults, failings, sins, and problems with the LDS Church. Mormons (for example, FARMS) defend themselves against such "anti-Mormon" attacks by a variety of arguments, the gist of which is that the Church is true despite errors and changes in scripture, imperfect leaders and members, problems and inconsistencies in theology, etc. In order to justify why a "Restoration" was necessary, Mormons have gone to great lengths to research, document, and publicize the faults, failings, sins, and problems with the Christian Churches since Jesus' time (see "The Great Apostasy" among many many others). Point: If the defenses Mormons offer against attacks on their Church are valid (if the Church really is "true" despite these problems), then why aren't those same "defenses" also valid for the Christian Churches Mormons attack? In other words, why can't the original Church established by Christ also be "true" despite all the problems the Mormons have identified, thereby eliminating the need for a Restoration in the first place? The foundation of the Mormon claim is inherently incoherent. I will continue to unravel. (Matt. 7:1-2) This wording change is one of thousands of examples of how so-called “Anti-Mormons” are going to great lengths to research, document, and publicize the faults, failings, sins, and problems with the LDS Church.

Mormons (for example, FARMS) defend themselves against such “anti-Mormon” attacks by a variety of arguments, the gist of which is that the Church is true despite errors and changes in scripture, imperfect leaders and members, problems and inconsistencies in theology, etc.

In order to justify why a “Restoration” was necessary, Mormons have gone to great lengths to research, document, and publicize the faults, failings, sins, and problems with the Christian Churches since Jesus’ time (see “The Great Apostasy” among many many others).

Point: If the defenses Mormons offer against attacks on their Church are valid (if the Church really is “true” despite these problems), then why aren’t those same “defenses” also valid for the Christian Churches Mormons attack?

In other words, why can’t the original Church established by Christ also be “true” despite all the problems the Mormons have identified, thereby eliminating the need for a Restoration in the first place?

The foundation of the Mormon claim is inherently incoherent. I will continue to unravel. (Matt. 7:1-2)

]]> By: Adventures in Mormonism » Blog Archive » What the Book of Mormon actually says http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-338 Adventures in Mormonism » Blog Archive » What the Book of Mormon actually says Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:23:00 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-338 [...] Juvenile Instructor (also this post) (LDS [...] [...] Juvenile Instructor (also this post) (LDS [...]

]]> By: David Grua http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-329 David Grua Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:49:11 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-329 Jana: We're always accepting applications. Having a woman around may prohibit us from being so juvenile, though. Jana: We’re always accepting applications. Having a woman around may prohibit us from being so juvenile, though.

]]> By: janaremy http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-328 janaremy Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:45:43 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-328 Nice Blog. Good content. Just one observation: you _guys_ need to bring a woman or two on board. :) Nice Blog. Good content. Just one observation: you _guys_ need to bring a woman or two on board. :)

]]> By: Comparing the 1981, 2004, and 2006 Book of Mormon Introductions « Juvenile Instructor http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-310 Comparing the 1981, 2004, and 2006 Book of Mormon Introductions « Juvenile Instructor Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:59:33 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-310 [...] Comments David Grua on Joseph Smith Papers Project: A...Jared on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo...Trevor on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo...Christopher on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo...Ben on [...] [...] Comments David Grua on Joseph Smith Papers Project: A…Jared on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo…Trevor on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo…Christopher on Change(s) in The Book of Mormo…Ben on [...]

]]> By: Jared http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-307 Jared Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:41:32 +0000 http://juvenileinstructor.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/change-in-book-of-mormon-introduction/#comment-307 Condor, thank you for the note. I thought we put small text to blind people, but I may have been out of the loop on that discussion :) Thanks for pointing that out, Trevor. I assume that like the story mentions, subsequent "official" editions of the BoM will have the original change in question and perhaps others. Perhaps not until there is a new "official" edition will the website reflect the differences. Condor, thank you for the note. I thought we put small text to blind people, but I may have been out of the loop on that discussion :)

Thanks for pointing that out, Trevor. I assume that like the story mentions, subsequent “official” editions of the BoM will have the original change in question and perhaps others. Perhaps not until there is a new “official” edition will the website reflect the differences.

]]>