Posted on 08/28/2007 4:29:33 PM PDT by Gamecock
Yeah, when all else fails, we must attack the messenger.
You mean like the way you attacked Joseph Smith?
Anyway, what does it mean when other dedicated anti-mormons "attack the messenger" as you say. I am no fan of the Tanners but even they recognize a lying, wife beating scoundrel when they see one. Ed Decker accused Jospeh Smith of being a liar and con man. I think it is important to realize the accuser was the very thing he was busy accusing others of. Sort of like OJ continuing to look for "the real murderer."
I do not expect that you can answer a single one of these questions with any honesty at all:
1. If the Book of Mormon really contains the fullness of the Gospel, why does it not teach the doctrine of “eternal progression”? (See D&C 20:8,9)
2. God said, “Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any”. How can there be Gods who are Elohim’s ancestors? Surely an all-knowing God would know this and wouldn’t speak falsehoods. (See Isa. 44:8 and Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, pg. 123)
3. How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no god formed, neither shall there be after me”? (Isaiah 43:10)
4. Joseph Smith stated that without the ordinances and authority of the priesthood no man can see the face of God and live (D & C 84:21, 22). He also said that he saw God in 1820 (Joseph Smith 2:17). Joseph Smith, however, never received any priesthood until 1829 (D&C 13). How did he see God and survive? In which was he in error: his revelation in D & C 84:21, 22 or his experience in the grove?
5. If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the Gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?
6. If Mormonism is the restored church, which is based upon the Bible, why are Mormon leaders so quick to state that the Bible is “translated wrong” when faced with some conflict between the Bible and Mormonism?
7. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, page 50)
8. Why did Christ not return in 1891 as Joseph Smith predicted? (History of the Church, Vol. 2 page 182).
9. How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon’s while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple? (See I Kings 5:13-18 and II Nephi 5:15-17)
10. If the book of Mormon is true, why hasn’t a valid geography been established for the book?
11. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (D & C 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324)
12. If the Book of Mormon is true, why do Indians fail to become white when they become Mormons? (II Nephi 30:6 – prior to 1981 revision)
13. What kind of chariots did the Nephites have in 90 B.C. some 1500 years before the introduction of the wheel on the Western Hemisphere? (Alma 18:9)
14. How do Mormons account for the italicized words in the King James Version (indicating their absence in the Hebrew and Greek) being found in the Book of Mormon? (A comparison of Mosiah 14 and Isaiah 53 will provide at least 13 examples)
15. How did the French word “adieu” get into the Book of Mormon? (Jacob 7:27)
16. How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighted about 230 lbs. Gold, with a density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lbs. Per cubic foot. The plates were 7” x 8” by about 6”. See Articles of Faith, by Talmage, page 262, 34th Ed.)
17. If the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, why have the Mormons changed it? (There have been over 3,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, exclusive of punctuation changes)
18. It has been established that the “Sensen” manuscript was simply a common Egyptian burial papyrus. Why do the Mormons still accept the Book of Abraham which was translated from that manuscript?
19. Why is it that no other writings have been found in the language of “Reformed Egyptian”, the supposed language of the Book of Mormon plates? Is there evidence that such a language really existed?
20. Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to heaven? (See The Young Woman’s Journal, Vol 3, pages 263, 264.)
When did you stop beating your wife?
http://www.contenderministries.org/mormonism/questions.php#
LOL, According to this site Freemasons and Catholics are cultists. Perhaps someone should have told the Founding Fathers most of whom wee practicing Masons that they were cultists. How about those Pro-Life Catholics. I always love this part of the anti-mormon sites which comes complete with a VISA/MAstercard gif. ,"Checks or money orders on U.S. currency can also be mailed to the P.O. Box listed above. Checks should be made payable to Contender Ministries: "
I do not expect that you can answer a single one of these questions with any honesty at all:
There are 58 questions from your cut and paste job. Why stop at 20?
Answers to your cut and paste can be found here http://lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg here http://www.fairlds.org/
Didn’t think so.......
1. If the Book of Mormon really contains the fullness of the Gospel, why does it not teach the doctrine of “eternal progression”? (See D&C 20:8,9)
Because the BOM does not contain the fullness of the gospel and had to be added to by subsequent “Prophets” who were left with filling in empty spaces in the “most correct” book ever written.
2. God said, “Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any”. How can there be Gods who are Elohim’s ancestors? Surely an all-knowing God would know this and wouldn’t speak falsehoods. (See Isa. 44:8 and Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, pg. 123)
Refer to answer 1. Once again, back-fill the missing “doctrine” to keep the troops engaged.
3. How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no god formed, neither shall there be after me”? (Isaiah 43:10)
No men can become God. There is only one.
4. Joseph Smith stated that without the ordinances and authority of the priesthood no man can see the face of God and live (D & C 84:21, 22). He also said that he saw God in 1820 (Joseph Smith 2:17). Joseph Smith, however, never received any priesthood until 1829 (D&C 13). How did he see God and survive? In which was he in error: his revelation in D & C 84:21, 22 or his experience in the grove?
Bit of a timeline problem here, eh?
5. If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the Gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?
Backfilling again...gotta keep that cash flowing.
6. If Mormonism is the restored church, which is based upon the Bible, why are Mormon leaders so quick to state that the Bible is “translated wrong” when faced with some conflict between the Bible and Mormonism?
Of course the Bible is wrong. Old Joe had it all figgered out.
7. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, page 50)
According to all Christians, but Mormons are NOT Christians.
8. Why did Christ not return in 1891 as Joseph Smith predicted? (History of the Church, Vol. 2 page 182).
Because he was a false Propohet.
9. How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon’s while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple? (See I Kings 5:13-18 and II Nephi 5:15-17)
Because them Nephites were quite the diligent workers.
10. If the book of Mormon is true, why hasn’t a valid geography been established for the book?
Because fiction like this has no basis in fact.
11. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (D & C 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324)
Because he wanted to keep this little “benefit” hush-hush so he could have his pick of the babes.
12. If the Book of Mormon is true, why do Indians fail to become white when they become Mormons? (II Nephi 30:6 – prior to 1981 revision)
Because that is complete BS.
13. What kind of chariots did the Nephites have in 90 B.C. some 1500 years before the introduction of the wheel on the Western Hemisphere? (Alma 18:9)
There were no chariots in America at the time. Unless, of course, they used something other than a wheel as a method for moving over land. But, then again, Old Joe was a bit uneducated about these things historically and figgered no one would know. Same can be said for metals used, weapons used, etc.
14. How do Mormons account for the italicized words in the King James Version (indicating their absence in the Hebrew and Greek) being found in the Book of Mormon? (A comparison of Mosiah 14 and Isaiah 53 will provide at least 13 examples)
Because part of the BOM was plagarized from the KJ version of the Bible. Hey, gotta fill in when you have writer’s block.
15. How did the French word “adieu” get into the Book of Mormon? (Jacob 7:27)
I love this one. Perhaps an ancestor of the Marquis de Lafayette was a pal of Old Joe’s.
16. How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighted about 230 lbs. Gold, with a density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lbs. Per cubic foot. The plates were 7” x 8” by about 6”. See Articles of Faith, by Talmage, page 262, 34th Ed.)
He was soooo healthy from practicing the Word of Wisdom, he had muscles of steel.
17. If the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, why have the Mormons changed it? (There have been over 3,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, exclusive of punctuation changes)
Because it was written by man.
18. It has been established that the “Sensen” manuscript was simply a common Egyptian burial papyrus. Why do the Mormons still accept the Book of Abraham which was translated from that manuscript?
Because they cannot believe anything right in front of them. Cultist morons refuse to believe objective, fact-based truth.
19. Why is it that no other writings have been found in the language of “Reformed Egyptian”, the supposed language of the Book of Mormon plates? Is there evidence that such a language really existed?
Because no such language ever existed; nowhere, no how.
20. Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to heaven? (See The Young Woman’s Journal, Vol 3, pages 263, 264.)
We now know that the moon is uninhabited, but Old Joe knew that fact could never be established at his point in history, based on current technology. A lie, is a lie, is a lie. Sorry, one lie is enough for me. The BOM is a piece of BM.
I don’t have time to proof read this, so pardon any spelling errors
1. The gospel is a PART of the plan of salvation, not the other way around. Specifically the gospel is faith in Christ, repentance, baptism by immersion by one holding authority, and receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost and enduring to the end in righteousness. You’ll find lots on all that in the BoM.
2. Read those verses in context, those things were said in the context of denouncing idol worship and there are numerous other places in the Bible that indicate the existence of gods who are reigned over by The Most High God. (see http://www.lightplanet.com/response/answers/gods.htm and http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/)
There is no doctrine stating that Heavenly Father had ancestors, the King Follet Discourse is not doctrine. Even if it was it would at most indicate that Heavenly Father previously experienced mortality as Christ did. Since both orthrodox Christians and Mormons accept that Christ was God before, during, and after his mortal life, the KFD in doesn’t mean there was a time when God was not God.
3. Again, the context is about idol worship. Christ cited Psalms 82 “Ye are gods” to defend himself against the charge of blasphemy when he claimed to be the Son of God. If you want to say that Psalms 82 was just metaphorically referring to mortal rulers then it would only be a valid defense if Christ was only metaphorically calling himself the Son of God.
Deification was taught in the Bible
# Rom. 8:16-17
# Luke 6:40
# Heb. 12:23
# Gal. 4:7
# Matt. 5:48
# Psalm 82:5-6
# Rev. 3:21
# 2Pet. 1:4
# 2Cor. 3:18
# Acts 17:29
# 1Pet. 3:7
# Dan. 12:3
And by the early Christians:
Saint Irenaeus
- “Do we cast blame on him [God] because we were not made gods at our beginning, but first we were made men, then, in the end, gods?
- How then will any be a god, if he has not first been made a man?
- Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, of his boundless love, became what we are that he might make us what he himself is.”
(the above quotes taken from: Henry Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers: A Selection from the Writings of the Fathers from St. Clement of Rome to St. Athanasius (London: Oxford University Press, 1956)
Clement of Alexandria
- “Yea, I say, the Word of God became a man so that you might learn from a man how to become a god.”
Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, 1.[
and
- “if one knows himself, he will know God, and knowing God will become like God. . . . His is beauty, true beauty, for it is God, and that man becomes a god, since God wills it.”
Clement of Alexandria, Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 3.1 see also Clement, Stromateis, 23
Justin Martyr
- “[in the beginning men] were made like God, free from suffering and death,” and that they are thus “deemed worthy of becoming gods and of having power to become sons of the highest”
Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 124.
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria
- “The Word was made flesh in order that we might be enabled to be made gods. . . . Just as the Lord, putting on the body, became a man, so also we men are both deified through his flesh, and henceforth inherit everlasting life.”
Athanasius, Against the Arians, 1.39, 3.39.
and
- “He became man that we might be made divine.”
Athanasius, On the Incarnation, 54.
Augustine of Hippo
- “But he himself that justifies also deifies, for by justifying he makes sons of God. ‘For he has given them power to become the sons of God’ [John 1:12]. If then we have been made sons of god, we have also been made gods.”
Augustine, On the Psalms, 50:2.
Then you have more modern theologians teaching the same idea and acknowledging deification was part of early Christianity...
C. S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory
“It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship.”
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
“The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were “gods” and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him-for we can prevent Him, if we choose-He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said”
Westminister Dictionary of Christian Theology:
Deification (Greek Theosis) is for orthodoxy the goal of every Christian. Man, according to the Bible, is ‘made in the image and likeness of God’...it is possible for man to become like God, to become deified, to become God by grace. This doctrine is based on many passages of both O.T. and N.T. (Psalms 82: (81) .6; 2 Peter 1:4), and it is essentially the teaching both of St. Paul, though he tends to use the language of filial adoption (Romans 8:9-17, Galatians 4:5-7) and the fourth gospel (John 17:21-23).
William R. Inge, Archbishop of Canterbury:
“God became man, that we might become God” was a commonplace of doctrinal theology at least until the time of Augustine, and that “deification holds a very large place in the writings of the fathers...We find it in Irenaeus as well as in Clement, in Athanasius as well in Gregory of Nysee. St. Augustine was no more afraid of deificari in Latin than Origen of apotheosis in Greek...To modern ears the word deification sounds not only strange but arrogant and shocking.
If you want to get the full reference for the quotes, they are at http://fairwiki.org/index.php/Deification_of_man
4. The verses do not say a person must be an ordained priesthood holder to behold the face of God, it says that without the ‘authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh.’ God has the authority of the priesthood and can exercise that authority to preserve the life of a mortal that they may behold his face.
5. See #1 and #2.
6. False premise, the church is based on Christ (he being the chief cornerstone) and his authority, not on a book. Christ has called modern day prophets who receive revelation from Christ to guide and direct the church in matters of doctrine and more.
Claiming that Bible is complete and free of any error is contradicted by the Bible itself.
The Bible itself clearly indicates there are missing books like book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21: 14); book of Jasher (Josh. 10: 13; 2 Sam. 1: 18); book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11: 41); book of Samuel the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Gad the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Nathan the prophet (1 Chr. 29: 29; 2 Chr. 9: 29); prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9: 29); visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr. 9: 29; 2 Chr. 12: 15; 2 Chr. 13: 22); book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12: 15); book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20: 34); sayings of the seers (2 Chr. 33: 19); an epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, earlier than our present 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 5: 9); possibly an earlier epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3: 3); an epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col. 4: 16); and some prophecies of Enoch, known to Jude (Jude 1: 14).
The Bible also has some pretty clear contradictions in it. 2 Chronicles 2:2 says that it took 153,600 men to build Solomon’s Temple. 1 Kings 5:13 says that the labor force was only 30,000 men working in three shifts of 10,000 each. According to the Bible, the earth is flat (see Isaiah 11:12, Jeremiah 49:32, Revelation 7:1, Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 28:24, etc.). Moses claimed that the hare “cheweth the cud” (Lev. 11:6)— they don’t. How many angels were at Christ’s tomb (see Matt. 28:2, Mark 16:5, Luke 24:4, and John 10:12)? Matthew wrote that the title on the cross above Jesus read: “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:37), while Mark claimed that the title simply read: “The King of the Jews” (Mark 15:26). Luke, however, recorded that the title read: “This is the King of the Jews” (Luke 23:38), and John claimed that the title read: “Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews” (John 19:19).
8. Because that is not what Joseph predicted. He said Christ would not come before 1890, and he was right.
9. Saying it was like Solomon’s temple doesn’t mean it was exactly like it in every way, in face Nephi specifically says otherwise:
“I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.”
I wouldn’t take that as meaning anything more than they had similar floor plans, and since it was about 60 years after they left Jerusalem the population would be more than just a few.
10. Turn on the Discovery Channel and you’ll find at least once a week some program on some newly discovered civiization. Only a fool would think that all previous civilizations left identifiable ruins and records, and that they have all been discovered. Absence of proof is not proof, but even so a lot of evidences supporting the BoM has been found. Check some of them out here: http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml
11. Why did the Hebrew midwives lie and tell Pharoh that the women were all giving birth before they had a chance to get there and kill the child? Why did God tell Abraham to keep secret about his half-sister being his wife? Why did God tell Moses to ask Pharaoh to just let the Hebrews go out 3 days into the desert when the real plan was to have them leave for the holy land and not come back?
Joseph knew people were not ready to accept the doctrine, and probably figured the reaction from non-Mormons would be violent. I’ll leave it to God to judge the matter, but I don’t expect perfection from any mortal.
Also, there were several faithful members he was teaching that doctrine too. There are also way, way easier ways to sleep with several women without taking on the obligations of marriage. I don’t see the motive you attribute as having any justification in fact, they come directly from your bias.
12. Because ‘white’ was used in the sense of being pure, not in changing skin tone. In the second edition of the BoM Joseph clarified that by changing ‘white’ to ‘pure’, but another edition was being printed in England at the same time without that clarification and subsequent editions unfortunately lost that clarification until it was restored in 1981.
13. Many wheeled toys dating to before Columbus have been found in central and south america, so it is very reasonable to believe a previous civilization knew of the wheel. Chariots would likely be made of wood (including the wheels) and so would be quite prone to deteriorating to the point of being undiscoverable.
Again, absense of proof is not proof of absence. There are several items mentioned in the BoM that for many long decades were considered anachronisms, but were then validated by later discoveries.
14. The lack of italic is perfectly consistent with the origin claimed for the BoM. In the KJV, those words are italicized to indicate they do not come from the manuscript, but were chosen by the translator. The BoM was not translated from Hebrew or Greek, and it was translated by the gift and power of God so there is no need to indicate that the wording is questionable or potentially influenced by the bias of the translator.
If you look even more closely, you will see some variations between the KJV text and the BoM text in some spots (so much for the accusation of copying it word for word). In some cases the changes represent a BETTER translation of the manuscripts used for the KJV than the KJV picked. In other cases the variations are supported by other Biblical manuscripts, including ones not found until AFTER the BoM was published. In a few cases there are minor wording changes not supported by any existing manuscript, but that is consistent with the BoM claim to use a source for Issiah that dates to at least 600 BC, older than any existing manuscript.
To create that as a fraud, a person would need an advanced knowledge of several ancient languages, and access to several biblical manuscripts including ones found after 1830. How did Joseph manage to do that?
15. English is a language that ‘steals’ words from other languages all the time. Adieu is a perfectly good English word that has appeared in English dictionaries, English literature, and in common English usage from long before Joseph Smith to the present.
Even if it was an exclusively French word, There is nothing odd about a translation drawing on a foreign word to convey the meaning and intent of the author as is done there.
16. First, we know the plates looked like gold, but there is nothing to rule out them being a gold alloy. Second, there is no way to know how thick each plate was, and how flat. If they were ‘bumpy’ there would be a lot of hollow space between the individual plates. Instead of trying to guess the weight based on a lot of shaky premises, why not accept the fact that 12 different men them and touched them, and lifted them and all twelve stood by their witness of them all their life.
17. The vast majority of ‘changes’ are things like breaking it up into chapters, numbering the verses, adding chapter summaries, correcting printing errors, standardizing the spelling to more modern standards etc. etc.
In a very few cases the wording of some verses were changed to clarify, not alter, the meaning. All these changes were made by Joseph Smith and published in his lifetime. If you would compare an original KJV with todays, you would find more changes than you would with the BoM. About 2/3 of the itallizied words in it today were not there at first.
18. In a nutshell: because that is not the source of the Book of Abraham. Only 13% of the scrolls Joseph owned back then still exist today, mostly in fragments. The only part of the source for the BoA that still exists today is a damaged Facsimile No. 1.
For a more in depth look see : http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Abraham_papyri_%28long%29
19. ‘Reformed Egyptian’ is not the name of their language, it is how they described their writings, as using character taken from Egyptian but modified according to their needs/wishes. Interestingly enough, there have been examples found in the old world of people doing that.
More info at: http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Reformed_Egyptian
20. That accusation is based on a third hand account of an adult recalling something he overheard others talking of when he was a small boy. Hardly convincing evidence that Joseph actually claimed what he was accused of.
You also fail to understand the nature of Prophets. They are not given God’s omniscience to know all things, they do at times get revelations from God but on those areas where they have received no revelation, their views are no more infallible than any other man’s. Peter, James and John probably though the earth was flat, so what.
In that era it was actually very common to believe that men lived on the Moon. Google the Great Moon Hoax sometime and read about how the NY Sun ran a 6 article series claiming a new telescope made it possible to see plants, animals, buildings, and flying men on the moon. It was widely published, believed by many intelligent and educated people, and was never retracted. Scientists like the man who discovered Uranus believed there was life on the moon, and also perhaps below the surface of the Sun too.
Oh my gawd, Grig. I can't believe you are posting that over here too? Do tell about the "flying men" on the moon.
“I can’t believe you are posting that over here too?”
Why not when the same false accusations are being posted here too.
Maybe these "accusations" that you are seeing everywhere, just might be true. Ever thought about that?
“Maybe these “accusations” that you are seeing everywhere, just might be true. Ever thought about that?”
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” — Joseph Goebbels
“A lie told often enough becomes truth” — Vladimir Lenin.
Although these men made careers for themselves thanks in part to people who seem to think like you; I’ll look at the merits of a claim, not how often it is repeated by the same group of closed minded and deeply biased individuals.
Now if you are going to stalk me all the way over from FreeDominion.ca to here, you could at least do the courtesy of answering here some things you avoided there.
Like why did you assert we will be genderless in the hereafter when the Bible refers to several angels as male, as well as the resurrected Christ http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1041370, or perhaps reply to that article on the Trinity you said you would reply to but haven’t http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=86537&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30, or at long last perhaps you could provide an authoritative definition of “nihil obstat” and “imprimatur” that validates your assertion that I am wrong when I say it indicates the Catholic Church has approved the publication is free of doctrinal error. http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=86537&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
I’ll get back to you on that. I have some other questions for you as well.
“... man became spiritually dead, totally unwilling and indeed incapable of seeking after God. God, from eternity past, having foreordained all things, joined a certain people to Christ Jesus, so that He might redeem them from their sin and in so doing bring glory to Himself. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died in the place of this elect people...” from http://aomin.org/AOFAITH.html
Since, by James White”s own belief, I am already where God has placed me, I am already fulfilling God,s plan. I can do nothing to change, by his belief. How many of us are not among the “elect”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.