Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sergeant1: Quoting someone and acknowledging the source of something you say or write is vastly different than pawning something off as your own--that is plagarism.
Preterist
Ya exactly I agree. I don't see anyone as pawning anything off as their own.
But if you are incinuating that Joseph did with the words of Isaiah then maybe you should read the Book of Mormon. That's just hypothetical because I'm sure someone of your intelligence wouldn't assume something so ignorant.
Ya exactly I agree. I don't see anyone as pawning anything off as their own.
But if you are incinuating that Joseph did with the words of Isaiah then maybe you should read the Book of Mormon. That's just hypothetical because I'm sure someone of your intelligence wouldn't assume something so ignorant.
Do you have the right to assume that I have NOT read the Book of Mormon? No, you do not! I have read the Book of Mormon and have compared it with the 1830 photocopied edition. There ARE many changes to this book that was supposedly given to Joseph Smith completely without error! Joseph Smith plagiarized the 1611 King James Version of the Bible. (Comare 1 Nephi 20 and 21 (cp. with Isaiah 48 and 49; 2 Nephi 12-24 with Isaiah 2-14; 2 Nephi 7 and 8 with Isaiah 50 and 51).
Speaking of ignorance--would you like me to point out the many, many grammatical errors in the Book of Mormon that have had to be corrected--simple errors in tense and subject-verb agreement that many grade school children would not make.
And what about the "quotes" VERBATIM from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John hundreds of years before these men were even born and spoke or wrote the words! Was this a special revelation given to the "Prophet" Nephi--exact words to be spoken hundreds of years from his day? And again, why are believers called "Chritians" in Alma 46:15 when that term had not even been coined yet?
No "burning in the bosom" can override the blatant and numerous errors in this book of fiction poorly written by Joseph Smith in a scheme to make money and gain power. No one should be afraid of the truth--it is what sets us free.
Do you have the right to assume that I have NOT read the Book of Mormon? No, you do not! I have read the Book of Mormon and have compared it with the 1830 photocopied edition. There ARE many changes to this book that was supposedly given to Joseph Smith completely without error! Joseph Smith plagiarized the 1611 King James Version of the Bible. (Comare 1 Nephi 20 and 21 (cp. with Isaiah 48 and 49; 2 Nephi 12-24 with Isaiah 2-14; 2 Nephi 7 and 8 with Isaiah 50 and 51).
Speaking of ignorance--would you like me to point out the many, many grammatical errors in the Book of Mormon that have had to be corrected--simple errors in tense and subject-verb agreement that many grade school children would not make.
And what about the "quotes" VERBATIM from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John hundreds of years before these men were even born and spoke or wrote the words! Was this a special revelation given to the "Prophet" Nephi--exact words to be spoken hundreds of years from his day? And again, why are believers called "Chritians" in Alma 46:15 when that term had not even been coined yet?
No "burning in the bosom" can override the blatant and numerous errors in this book of fiction poorly written by Joseph Smith in a scheme to make money and gain power. No one should be afraid of the truth--it is what sets us free.
Preterist
Preterist, I'm sorry if I offended you. I did not mean to make an assumption.
You're certainly entitled to your opinions.
Go back and read my last post. There is no plagiarism. The Holy Spirit who inspired the writers of the gospels is the same spirit who inspired ancient American prophets, so does it surprise you that the words may be similar? The book is true whether you or I or anyone believes it or not. I invite casual readers of these posts not to take a rabid anti-Mormon's word for it or a Mormon's word for it but to read the Book of Mormon themselves.
Preterist will not discuss specifics. Let him spew his venom all he wants. Sincere seekers of truth will seek it for themselves and not rely on the words of others.
And no, I didn’t watch that movie, because I felt it would be as unfair to Evangelicals as the movies made about Mormons. But if you are going to throw out movies, realize it cuts both ways. Anyone can make anyone else look really dumb with creative editing and manipulation.
Sergeant1: Quoting someone and acknowledging the source of something you say or write is vastly different than pawning something off as your own--that is plagarism.
Preterist
And, my dear Preterist, any section in the Book of Mormon containing passages from other Prophets is clearly linked to the source. Readers are referred to the original writings and challenged to compare the two texts. Next, I can point to a number of passages in the New Testament that are taken directly from the Old Testament and the source is not mentioned. Finally, unless you are legal counsel for Isaiah, or hold a copyright on the writings of Isaiah or any other prophet for that matter and are intent on commencing a civil action, plagiarism does not apply.
May I see your papers and permit, please? Pay no attention to the barbed wire and machineguns. They are here simply to ensure you have a good time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's just hypothetical because I'm sure someone of your intelligence wouldn't assume something so ignorant. 
