The Book of Mormon

[Anonymous No.18646447]

Is it divinely inspired?

[Anonymous No.18646462]

>>18646447
No. I've tried reading it. It's really badly written. God had nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous No.18646484]

>>18646447
Of course, especially the part about niggers being bad

[Anonymous No.18646490]

Mormon is the most powerful Digimon

[Anonymous No.18646500]

>>18646462
By this logic we should all become Muslim because the Quran is poetic

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18646543]

https://youtu.be/UXCtt7NOLa8

[Anonymous No.18646676]

>>18646500
No. That would be a double implication <->. I only used a single implication ->.

[Anonymous No.18646699]

Yes, divine inspiration for a funny broadway musical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emuT-PFCyKE

[Anonymous No.18646706]

>>18646447
Yes it is.

[Anonymous No.18646711]

i feel like this is a stealth question asking which one of us actually believes/subscribes to mormon ideaology.

[Anonymous No.18646722]

>>18646711
The last thread on this topic went for over 300 posts for days til it autosaged and stayed a quality discussion between Mormons and critics, wonder how long this one will last.

[Anonymous No.18646729]

>>18646447
No. It's an invention of Protestants.

[Anonymous No.18646742]

>>18646711
I've just been reading about alternative archeological theories in North America (copper mining, complex copper tools, and petroglyphs of ships in precolumbian Michigan) and now I'm curious if the Book of Mormon with all its whacky alt-history of the ancient Americas is actually onto something

[Anonymous No.18646743]

>>18646729
Mormonism has more in common with Orthodoxy and Catholicism than it does with Protestantism, believe it or not.

[Anonymous No.18646749]

>>18646742
Do you know about the Bluff Point Stoneworks? Those were geographically close to Cumorah. To this day little is known about them because the archaeological site was not treated well and people haven't gone back to dig since the 19th century. But apparently the people who did archaeology speculated that the remains were of Old World origin.

[Anonymous No.18646769]

>>18646743
how lol mormons believe apostolic succession was broken

[Anonymous No.18646867]

>>18646769
They believe in it regardless. They believe it was restored by the original apostles, returned as angels, and after this they are very specific about preserving their restored version of apostolic succession. Their theological reason for dismissing the priesthood of the old Catholics and Orthodox is very different from the Protestant motivations, which are anti-clerical altogether. Protestants self-ordain themselves to the ministry. They don't believe in apostolic succession at all.

[Anonymous No.18646921]

Mormonism is kino:

https://youtu.be/DygZpSdjQXM

[Anonymous No.18646933]

>>18646447
As much as any other religious text.

[Anonymous No.18646969]

So what's the LDS stance on KJV translation errors appearing in the Book of Mormon?

[Anonymous No.18647019]

>>18646969
What's the Christian stance on the Masoretic medieval revisions that made it into the KJV, and the fact one can't favor the Vulgate or Septuagint or Dead Sea Scrolls any better because they too have disagreements with one another?

[Anonymous No.18647031]

>>18646500
Yes

[Anonymous No.18647036]

>>18647031
They should become atheists next because Thus Spake Zarathustra is poetic.

[Anonymous No.18647037]

>>18646447
No book is divinely inspired.
The book of Mormon is a book.
Therefore, the book of Mormon is not divinely inspired.

[Anonymous No.18647061]

>>18647036
yeah every time I read poetry I drastically shift my religious and philosophical views

[Anonymous No.18647103]

>>18647019
There is a great deal of difference between translation errors over literal thousands of years, some motivated by Jewish sects seeking to bury lines such as Deuteronomy 32:8-9, none of which grievously affect foundational doctrine, and language matching translation errors from another text in a writing said to be translated with literal divine aid. Answer the question.

[Anonymous No.18647228]

>>18647103
I do want to answer it but I feel I'll get more out of it if I can get you to reflect on certain themes for yourself instead of me telling you what to think, only to be easily dismissed. It's Socratic. The alterations in Deuteronomy 32 massively affect foundational doctrine by the way, but I'll put that aside. Here's what I want you to think about. Is God to be excused if his verbatim original Word is lost to time? For if that is allowed, then you end up allowing the Word of God to be altered and for God be excused. And what are you saying then, that it doesn't matter much if the current texts aren't identical to the originals, so long as the underlying inspiration is more or less preserved? Alternatively: Are you saying God is excused because those alterations don't injure the underlying "spirit" of the Word (to speak in metaphor), and that this "spirit" of the Word can take many outward forms in language, without those alterations injuring its status as divine and inspired? Which do you take?

[Anonymous No.18647255]

>>18647061
Why is this man's pp almost exposed?

[Anonymous No.18647297]

What do Mormons hate coffee? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-dfOQUc8vQ

[Anonymous No.18647324]

>>18647228
Answer the question. I think you have a clever response typed up regardless of which way I would answer, anyway.

[Anonymous No.18647330]

>>18647255
SEX

[Anonymous No.18647686]

>>18646447
do me and the rest of /lit/ a favor and fuck off for good

[࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇ !KNDY3cHnRY No.18647726]

IT IS DEVILISHLY DEVISED.

[Anonymous No.18647759]

>>18646867
and that is different from Mormons how

[Anonymous No.18647872]

>>18646699
That was a surprisingly coherent adaptation

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18647874]

>>18647726
Doofusly devised

[Anonymous No.18647980]

>>18647874
you're a dyke

[Anonymous No.18648077]

>>18646676
Based logical argumentator calling out logiclets