Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32098 comments on the CNN story from Oct 12, 2011, titled Who says Mormons aren't Christians?. In it, CNN reports that:

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#24105 Apr 24, 2013
Timeline of Bible Translation History

1,400 BC: The first written Word of God: The Ten Commandments delivered to Moses.

500 BC: Completion of All Original Hebrew Manuscripts which make up The 39 Books of the Old Testament.

200 BC: Completion of the Septuagint Greek Manuscripts which contain The 39 Old Testament Books AND 14 Apocrypha Books.

1st Century AD: Completion of All Original Greek Manuscripts which make up The 27 Books of the New Testament.

315 AD: Athenasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, identifies the 27 books of the New Testament which are today recognized as the canon of scripture.

382 AD: Jerome's Latin Vulgate Manuscripts Produced which contain All 80 Books (39 Old Test.+ 14 Apocrypha + 27 New Test).

500 AD: Scriptures have been Translated into Over 500 Languages.

600 AD: LATIN was the Only Language Allowed for Scripture.

995 AD: Anglo-Saxon (Early Roots of English Language) Translations of The New Testament Produced.

1384 AD: Wycliffe is the First Person to Produce a (Hand-Written) manuscript Copy of the Complete Bible; All 80 Books.

1455 AD: Gutenberg Invents the Printing Press; Books May Now be mass-Produced Instead of Individually Hand-Written. The First Book Ever Printed is Gutenberg's Bible in Latin.

1516 AD: Erasmus Produces a Greek/Latin Parallel New Testament.

1522 AD: Martin Luther's German New Testament.

1526 AD: William Tyndale's New Testament; The First New Testament printed in the English Language.

1535 AD: Myles Coverdale's Bible; The First Complete Bible printed in the English Language (80 Books: O.T. & N.T. & Apocrypha).

1537 AD: Tyndale-Matthews Bible; The Second Complete Bible printed in English. Done by John "Thomas Matthew" Rogers (80 Books).

1539 AD: The "Great Bible" Printed; The First English Language Bible Authorized for Public Use (80 Books).

1560 AD: The Geneva Bible Printed; The First English Language Bible to add Numbered Verses to Each Chapter (80 Books).

1568 AD: The Bishops Bible Printed; The Bible of which the King James was a Revision (80 Books).

1609 AD: The Douay Old Testament is added to the Rheims New Testament (of 1582) Making the First Complete English Catholic Bible; Translated from the Latin Vulgate (80 Books).

1611 AD: The King James Bible Printed; Originally with All 80 Books. The Apocrypha was Officially Removed in 1885 Leaving Only 66 Books.

1782 AD: Robert Aitken's Bible; The First English Language Bible (KJV) Printed in America.

1791 AD: Isaac Collins and Isaiah Thomas Respectively Produce the First Family Bible and First Illustrated Bible Printed in America. Both were King James Versions, with All 80 Books.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#24106 Apr 24, 2013
1808 AD: Jane Aitken's Bible (Daughter of Robert Aitken); The First Bible to be Printed by a Woman.

1833 AD: Noah Webster's Bible; After Producing his Famous Dictionary, Webster Printed his Own Revision of the King James Bible.

1841 AD: English Hexapla New Testament; an Early Textual Comparison showing the Greek and 6 Famous English Translations in Parallel Columns.

1846 AD: The Illuminated Bible; The Most Lavishly Illustrated Bible printed in America. A King James Version, with All 80 Books.

1863 AD: Robert Young's "Literal" Translation; often criticized for being so literal that it sometimes obscures the contextual English meaning.

1885 AD: The "English Revised Version" Bible; The First Major English Revision of the KJV.

1901 AD: The "American Standard Version"; The First Major American Revision of the KJV.

1952 AD: The "Revised Standard Version" (RSV); said to be a Revision of the 1901 American Standard Version, though more highly criticized.

1971 AD: The "New American Standard Bible" (NASB) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Word for Word English Translation" of the Bible.

1973 AD: The "New International Version" (NIV) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Phrase for Phrase English Translation" of the Bible.

1982 AD: The "New King James Version" (NKJV) is Published as a "Modern English Version Maintaining the Original Style of the King James."

1990 AD: The "New Revised Standard Version" (NRSV); further revision of 1952 RSV,(itself a revision of 1901 ASV), criticized for "gender inclusiveness".

2002 AD: The English Standard Version (ESV) is Published as a translation to bridge the gap between the accuracy of the NASB and the readability of the NIV.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#24107 Apr 24, 2013
MATTHEW 13:24-30

24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.

27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24108 Apr 24, 2013
David wrote:
Is this what they do everytime someone comes in and debunks them?

They just say that that was the last person that debunked them before?

Oh wow you get a butt whoopin and all you can do is say "oh you're just that guy that whooped my butt before"...

ooooooookkkkkk
There's that big inflated ego. Hahahahahaha!!! Wow! You got all that in me asking someone if they meant, "welcome back"?

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24109 Apr 24, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>From "concerned in Egypt"
If you are seeking prejudiced biased so called truth about the LDS, the Mormon Sect then keep reading. I love prejudicial biased information about Mormons. It's great stuff! See, I don't have the mental capacity to read actual Mormon history/doctrine to make a sound opinion from, that's a waste of my time, know what I mean?
If you want access to verifiable prejudiced biased footnoted sources that you can verify yourself
Then these sites below are for you as all document their assertions with twisted corrupted EVIDENCE Biblical Historical and all are verifiable as prejudiced and biased in heavy overtones. The reason for this is because it's no fun to state actual information that isn't fit to prejudicial biased viewpoints. Don't you agree?
Because the Truth Matters not as long as I and my buds can have something negative to say even if it's a lie, we like to be agitators for God. So even if we lie to prove an irrational point, we have Gods approval to be his liars because lying for our opinions is a matter of truth to us. Understand?
Sometimes it appears, I did say 'appear' vial name callers who are solely here posting on this thread with the direct intent to clutter the pages of this thread so real honest debate cannot take place appears to be ourselves. But that's just a matter of appearance and is just a figment of your imagination, know what I mean?
I mean take the statement by the Smithsonian made in 1980 that they have never used the BOM for information and that what it contains hasn't been proved to exist. That statement was made in 1980. Thirty-three years have passed since that statement. If I was to look at any evidence science has found out about America in the last 33 years, I wouldn't be able to reference what thhe Smithsonian claimed 33 years ago. See my train of thinking? Isn't it devious in a godly way? I think so :)
http://mit.irr.org/category/mormonism-and-chr ...
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp ...
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/d ...
http://www.mrm.org/
http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/
http://www.utlm.org/
http://irr.org/
http://carm.org/
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/search/colle ...
http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/index.h ...
Hahahahahaha!!!! Nice...

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24110 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
I have reported No surprise for re-wording my posts and claiming I wrote them.

I hope they ban you as your actions clearly wrong fraudulent and dishonest.
"Are" clearly wrong, fraudulent, and dishonest."

Wow! When you're wound up, you make all kinds of mistakes. Only to our benefit, it shows what a complete fraud you are and thief of other people's thoughts, ideas, and work. You're nothing but a lazy hack who copies and pastes others work as your own. DA

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24111 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>Hey Daivd is man who may know his stuff.

Jesus's flesh Highly Highly probable he was not white as he was of line of King David Via Mary.

Definitely not Blue eyed and Blonde hair. Most likely brown eyes brown skin and dark hair is educated,High Probability if one takes the evidence in to consideration.

I am of White lineage colour does not make to God he loves all the flower of the field blue red yellow white brown black equally.

God does not make mistakes

God the Father and the Holy Ghost both are Spirit neither has a body and thus no skin color.
Truth Matters.

If Jesus manifested himself in Brigham Young's day B.Y. would not allow him into an LDS temple as he belived blacks were neutral in heaven and did not help Jesus in the Spirtual uprising by Lucifer.

Ironic is it not.
Your writing style is horrible. When not plagiarizing, try slowing down, using proper punctuation, and proof reading "before" you post. It will help make sense out of what you're trying to convey.

Because proper grammar matters.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#24112 Apr 24, 2013
Want a piece of history?
Read these Book download Free PDF!

THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE OXFORD MOVEMENT
http://archive.org/stream/secrethistoryofo00w...

OR

Fox's Book of Martyrs
http://manybooks.net/titles/foxej2240022400-8... #

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#24113 Apr 24, 2013
EXCUSE ME...

AND... not OR...

Read both, be informed.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#24114 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
I have reported No surprise for re-wording my posts and claiming I wrote them.
I hope they ban you as your actions clearly wrong fraudulent and dishonest.
You go dude, two can play this game :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#24115 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
I have reported No surprise for re-wording my posts and claiming I wrote them.
I hope they ban you as your actions clearly wrong fraudulent and dishonest.
I was reprimanded :) My bad and I apologize to you ;)P
But I did do something I have wanted to do for a long time.
I reported you for your repasts and I even supplied the post numbers for every paste from the web you have made in the last 30 hours.
I also notified them you paste but won't answer questions.
Let us know how it goes okay?
concerned in Egypt

Aberdeen, UK

#24117 Apr 24, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You go dude, two can play this game :)
Case in point for this person its a game.

For me its a matter of Truth Honor Integrity and Honesty.

For me its all about Jesus.

Because Truth Matters LDS are not Christians
concerned in Egypt

Aberdeen, UK

#24118 Apr 24, 2013
Livinginthelandofcrazy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Are" clearly wrong, fraudulent, and dishonest."
Wow! When you're wound up, you make all kinds of mistakes. Only to our benefit, it shows what a complete fraud you are and thief of other people's thoughts, ideas, and work. You're nothing but a lazy hack who copies and pastes others work as your own. DA
Well as you can see above Topix agrees with my positon.

nosuprise apologized admitting he was wrong.

I was not wound up a bit tired when I posted just finished a 14 hour shift offshore when I made the typo error.

What is your excuse for being a Hypocrite?

"you are and thief of other people's thoughts" LOL ROFL

You would think if you are going to accuse someone of a grammatical error you make sure your accusation did not have one of its own.

Hey no surprise here all three of you here are posting contradictions.

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24119 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>Well as you can see above Topix agrees with my positon.

nosuprise apologized admitting he was wrong.

I was not wound up a bit tired when I posted just finished a 14 hour shift offshore when I made the typo error.

What is your excuse for being a Hypocrite?

"you are and thief of other people's thoughts" LOL ROFL

You would think if you are going to accuse someone of a grammatical error you make sure your accusation did not have one of its own.

Hey no surprise here all three of you here are posting contradictions.
Hahahahahaha!!! Nailed me. Nice... My excuse? I was sitting on the toilet, and was in the middle of wiping.
concerned in Egypt

Aberdeen, UK

#24120 Apr 24, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
1808 AD: Jane Aitken's Bible (Daughter of Robert Aitken); The First Bible to be Printed by a Woman.
1833 AD: Noah Webster's Bible; After Producing his Famous Dictionary, Webster Printed his Own Revision of the King James Bible.
1841 AD: English Hexapla New Testament; an Early Textual Comparison showing the Greek and 6 Famous English Translations in Parallel Columns.
1846 AD: The Illuminated Bible; The Most Lavishly Illustrated Bible printed in America. A King James Version, with All 80 Books.
1863 AD: Robert Young's "Literal" Translation; often criticized for being so literal that it sometimes obscures the contextual English meaning.
1885 AD: The "English Revised Version" Bible; The First Major English Revision of the KJV.
1901 AD: The "American Standard Version"; The First Major American Revision of the KJV.
1952 AD: The "Revised Standard Version" (RSV); said to be a Revision of the 1901 American Standard Version, though more highly criticized.
1971 AD: The "New American Standard Bible" (NASB) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Word for Word English Translation" of the Bible.
1973 AD: The "New International Version" (NIV) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Phrase for Phrase English Translation" of the Bible.
1982 AD: The "New King James Version" (NKJV) is Published as a "Modern English Version Maintaining the Original Style of the King James."
1990 AD: The "New Revised Standard Version" (NRSV); further revision of 1952 RSV,(itself a revision of 1901 ASV), criticized for "gender inclusiveness".
2002 AD: The English Standard Version (ESV) is Published as a translation to bridge the gap between the accuracy of the NASB and the readability of the NIV.
Thank you for showing the Bible we have today has an unbroken history of existence. That it was never lost nor has the meaning and doctrines that one gains from it through Hermeneutics and Exegesis of its text in any era or language has changed for some 3000+ years.

The Bible of Today is validated by some 8000+ ancient manuscripts that have been used to check for any errors.
When included with the Copies from 300AD on to 800AD some hundreds of thousands + found in many regions of the world in different languages with no substantial differences to the ancient texts we can say with no doubt the Bible is 99.99% ACCURATE TO THE ORIGINAL PENNED BOOKS.

But even if we did not have any originals of the NT for example we can reconstruct the NT solely from thousands of letters and writings of Church Fathers quoting the originals as Scripture which they had at the time in their possession and again achieve a 99.99% accurate Bible of the Original texts.

When this is compared to the Snake charmers story of the BofM who could not even hang on to the original for more than a few years because God wanted it his gold back it is like comparing night and day.

The issue that the LDS need to seriously consider is if the Bible had been corrupted then why did God give J.S. an original and then take it back?
This contradicts logic and God is Logic. GET IT.

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24121 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>Well as you can see above Topix agrees with my positon.

nosuprise apologized admitting he was wrong.

I was not wound up a bit tired when I posted just finished a 14 hour shift offshore when I made the typo error.

What is your excuse for being a Hypocrite?

"you are and thief of other people's thoughts" LOL ROFL

You would think if you are going to accuse someone of a grammatical error you make sure your accusation did not have one of its own.

Hey no surprise here all three of you here are posting contradictions.
"I was not wound up a bit tired when I posted just finished a 14 hour shift offshore when I made the typo error."

I think that just might be considered a run-on sentence. After re-reading it, I'd definitely say it is. Here, this link might help you.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/runons...
concerned in Egypt

Aberdeen, UK

#24122 Apr 24, 2013
Livinginthelandofcrazy wrote:
<quoted text>
Hahahahahaha!!! Nailed me. Nice... My excuse? I was sitting on the toilet, and was in the middle of wiping.
It was not hard to "Nail you" as you put it your posts are crude and simple clearly you do not represent the normal LDS. The LDS I know personally are way better mannered and respectful than you.

I doubt you are LDS just a pagan most likely.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#24123 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for showing the Bible we have today has an unbroken history of existence. That it was never lost nor has the meaning and doctrines that one gains from it through Hermeneutics and Exegesis of its text in any era or language has changed for some 3000+ years.
The Bible of Today is validated by some 8000+ ancient manuscripts that have been used to check for any errors.
When included with the Copies from 300AD on to 800AD some hundreds of thousands + found in many regions of the world in different languages with no substantial differences to the ancient texts we can say with no doubt the Bible is 99.99% ACCURATE TO THE ORIGINAL PENNED BOOKS.
But even if we did not have any originals of the NT for example we can reconstruct the NT solely from thousands of letters and writings of Church Fathers quoting the originals as Scripture which they had at the time in their possession and again achieve a 99.99% accurate Bible of the Original texts.
When this is compared to the Snake charmers story of the BofM who could not even hang on to the original for more than a few years because God wanted it his gold back it is like comparing night and day.
The issue that the LDS need to seriously consider is if the Bible had been corrupted then why did God give J.S. an original and then take it back?
This contradicts logic and God is Logic. GET IT.
I can do you one better. Even the Mormon church is now saying the NT is uncorrupted:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865577544/...

The early leaders claims that "there isn't even one verse uncorrupted" was another LDS lie.

Since: Sep 12

Ozark, MO

#24124 Apr 24, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>It was not hard to "Nail you" as you put it your posts are crude and simple clearly you do not represent the normal LDS. The LDS I know personally are way better mannered and respectful than you.

I doubt you are LDS just a pagan most likely.
Again, poorly written, and poorly punctuated. I know in the UK you follow a different set of grammatical rules; however, do you use commas and periods? Since I'm in a good mood, I'll fix this for you.

It was not hard to "nail you" as you put it. Your posts are crude and simple. Clearly you do not represent the normal LDS. The LDS I know personally are way better mannered and more respectful than you.

I doubt you are LDS, just a pagan most likely.

Because proper grammar matters.:-)

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#24125 Apr 24, 2013
Mormon GA hates science:
&fe ature=youtu.be

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Julia 1,655,638
News Final push for Moore and Jones in Alabama Senat... 3 min CodeTalker 5
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 4 min Memo from Turner 45,683
News Gay man denied marriage license hopes to unseat... 6 min Wisdom 51
News Al Franken leaves Washington after speaking on ... 9 min Sour Note 87
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 10 min Big Al 1,512
News Most Alabama Republicans say they are voting fo... 13 min Sour Note 24
News Obama: Protect democracy or risk taking path of... 48 min Red Crosse 120
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 51 min Smackdown2017 1,098
More from around the web