Changes made to the Book of Mormon.

Post by **_Abinadi's Fire** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:13 am

You know what is really interesting?

Mordecai M Noah wrote articles under the pen-name "Mulek" for the Charleston South Carolina Times in the early 1800s, pre-1820.

Post by **_harmony** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:13 am

Imwashingmypirate wrote:But white symbolises pure.

The vast majority of people in the world would not agree with this statement. If they did, they'd be certain no one with their color of skin (black, brown, red, yellow) would ever be pure.

And white isn't really white. White is pinkish tan.

Post by **_Imwashingmypirate** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:15 am

Anyone can be pure. Maybe God is racist :P

Post by **_SatanWasSetUp** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:25 am

The great thing about making changes to the Book of Mormon is nobody cares. 99.8% of the people in the world will never read the book. The other 0.2% only read the first couple chapters in 1 Nephi, then skip to Moroni Chapter 10, pray and get a testimony of its truthfulness. Then they read a few random verses here and there when they are called on in Sunday School. The brethren know this, which is why they know they can make changes to it without too many people knowing or caring.

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:27 am

harmony wrote:
Imwashingmypirate wrote:But white symbolises pure.

The vast majority of people in the world would not agree with this statement. If they did, they'd be certain no one with their color of skin (black, brown, red, yellow) would ever be pure.

And white isn't really white. White is pinkish tan.

You obviously haven't seen my mother's legs. White is completely and totally white.

Post by **_solomarineris** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:10 pm

Imwashingmypirate wrote:But white symbolises pure.

have you seen people wearing white suits(males)?
Besides being looked like a dork, it is ugly.

Post by **_SatanWasSetUp** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:19 pm

Imwashingmypirate wrote:But white symbolises pure.

Exactly, that's why the white guys in the Book of Mormon are good and the dark skin guys are bad.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:24 pm

Abinadi's Fire wrote:
Phaedrus Ut wrote:Mosiah 21:28 from ""...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Benjamin had a gift from God..." to "...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Mosiah had a gift from God..."

That seems more like a compositional error rather than a translation error.

Phaedrus

There may be more to this error than first meets the eye. The error was repeated in Ether 4:1 in the 1830 edition.

It could have been King Benjamin. Although Mosiah reigned, Benjamin lived several years afterwards and might have translated the records. In my Book of Mormon, I changed it back.

Post by **_Abinadi's Fire** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:29 pm

I think it is evidence that the book was composed along a contemporary timeline, and reflects an error in the redaction process. The contemporary error was due to the death of one of the characters who reflected a real-life person and in the redaction process the error was not noticed until a late date.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:49 pm

Abinadi's Fire wrote:I think it is evidence that the book was composed along a contemporary timeline, and reflects an error in the redaction process. The contemporary error was due to the death of one of the characters who reflected a real-life person and in the redaction process the error was not noticed until a late date.

Unless it's not an error?