NO I DO NOT AGREE WITH MORONI 8:18 or ANYTHING ELSE IN THE FALSE LDS GOSPEL!!!!
This campaign is ill concieved and will ONLY serve to further the deception that Mormons are Christians and keep them in that cult.
This campaign is already backfiring on the ministry involved and none of the people (many I know personally) involved in this campaign were ever LDS and have no idea how the LDS spin this verse.
Even the parts of the Book of Mormon that Smith plagiarized from the Bible should not be agreed with. Agree with the Bible not a work of FICTION.
BTW, if you would like an answer on how I would have responded to this when I was LDS, feel free to ask. This isn’t a ‘gotcha’ to them at all.
Avoid this campaign, please.
As always, Reaganaut & Szonian, you make some good points.
I'll take your advice & not post future threads re: this campaign.
Beyond the campaign, tho, it's worthwhile having a discussion how ex-Mormons and Christians deal with...
...both the plagiarized word-for-word KJV chapters imported in the BoM as well as plagiarized phrases lifted from the KJV;
...and then thirdly, what do we do with ANY common-ground theological statements?
If we were to draw this on a continuum, I see it as:
Many ex-Mormons' position would be similar to yours, which I might take liberty by using this analogy: "Hey, even if that plate looks like any other plate, why would you serve up anybody food on that knowing both its source and the fact that it's been 'dishwashed' with sewer water?"
(This is a pretty tough argument to try to oppose)
Certainly in this way, I didn't think through the verses Paul deals with a similar matter -- eating meat sacrificed to idols. I should have at least drawn a parallel from 1 Cor. 10:25-33 before posting:
25 Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26 for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.” 27 If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, both for the sake of the one who told you and for the sake of conscience. 29 I am referring to the other person’s conscience, not yours. For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for? 31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— 33 even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.
Certainly I am thankful that God's word is not chained or bound (what Paul said of the Gospel to Timothy), but I should have realized the objections it would raise. Still, this matter also goes beyond the Book of Mormon, as Muhammad lifted many phrases from the Bible -- and I certainly don't sanction the Koran.
On the other side of the continuum is the phrase, "All truth is God's truth." This position assumes...
...that no matter what source is trying to distort God's truth, it was His before the usurpers came along...therefore, we honor the Original Dispenser -- not its secondary capitalizers;
...and, that at least from jumpstarting dialogue, we recognize common-ground beliefs.
Certainly dangers exist with this last position:
(1) Do we inadvertently wind up sanctioning poison-well sources?
(2) Do we fail to recognize one of the points brought out in the Hollywood movie, The Book of Eli?
For those of you who haven't seen that movie, one character is desperate to get a complete Bible -- and fully for lack of noble purposes.
He believes the way to deal with social anarchy is to "control the masses" via becoming the chokepoint for no doubt what could be a "filtered" presentation of the Bible to serve that leader's ambitious purposes.
Therefore, were this leader to gain control of a Bible for self-serving purposes, he would have no doubt suppressed a good chunk of it while probably releasing his "reader's digest" version of it.
The parallels with Smith would then be striking:
Smith carefully chose which chapters and phrases from the Bible he wanted to import to give the BoM an air of authenticity;
He suppressed most of it;
He used it for ignoble purposes -- to establish himself as a religious leader and then glorify himself...Even Brigham Young in D&C 136:6 says that Smith & his brother "lived for glory."
Etc.
Anyway, Reaganaut & Szonian: It's obviously I offended each of you, and I'm sorry. I should have thought through how highlighting this campaign effects ex-Mormons). And I should have thought through its implications. It doesn't mean that this whole issue (my I mentioned in the third graph I wrote above) should not be discussed -- re: advantages, disadvantages, and what the Lord would have us do.
And I suggest people read Texson66's Galatians 1 admonition to me. We need to ask the question, "By highlighting even a smidgen of a false gospel -- even when that portion might be in agreement with the Bible, do we advertently promote it?"