Page 1 of 4
Scans of old/new Book of Mormon introductions confirms the change!
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:29 am
by _Polygamy Porter
The original thread concerning these changes was getting too long, so I started a fresh one
Thanks to John Larsen on Postmormon.org for
doing the scans
First edition DoubleDay print:
Recent printing with the change:
Time to email Peggy at the Trib?
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:03 pm
by _LifeOnaPlate
As I've never viewed the Introduction as canonical, I welcome the change.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:05 pm
by _Mercury
LifeOnaPlate wrote:As I've never viewed the Introduction as canonical, I welcome the change.
Umm, I was told that BRM was creating scripture in Seminary. So Booya! You are wrong.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:23 pm
by _LifeOnaPlate
Mercury wrote:LifeOnaPlate wrote:As I've never viewed the Introduction as canonical, I welcome the change.
Umm, I was told that BRM was creating scripture in Seminary. So Booya! You are wrong.
I don't feel obligated to agree with your seminary teacher.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:24 pm
by _LifeOnaPlate
For what it's worth, I don't feel obligated to believe my own teachers, either. ;)
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:24 pm
by _Mercury
LifeOnaPlate wrote:Mercury wrote:LifeOnaPlate wrote:As I've never viewed the Introduction as canonical, I welcome the change.
Umm, I was told that BRM was creating scripture in Seminary. So Booya! You are wrong.
I don't feel obligated to agree with your seminary teacher.
Why not? I felt the spirit. You can't deny my witness.
Re: Scans of old/new Book of Mormon introductions confirms the change!
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:29 pm
by _Rollo Tomasi
Polygamy Porter wrote:The original thread concerning these changes was getting too long, so I started a fresh one
Wow! That is a major change, and a positive one, in my opinion. I think this is clear recognition of science and its overwhelming case against the "principal" claim.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:35 pm
by _LifeOnaPlate
Mercury wrote:Why not? I felt the spirit. You can't deny my witness.
I disagree. Am I allowed to disagree? ;)
Huh
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:49 pm
by _Imwashingmypirate
They are both identical. Word for word.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:51 pm
by _Mercury
LifeOnaPlate wrote:Mercury wrote:Why not? I felt the spirit. You can't deny my witness.
I disagree. Am I allowed to disagree? ;)
No you are not. My unreliable emotional bull Trump's yours because I say so
:P