tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8261814012053869943.post1384938904536241514..comments2023-10-09T03:39:02.388-06:00Comments on Expository Lutheran: The Image of God in the Book of MormonBror Ericksonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06913133289813136695noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8261814012053869943.post-27711294318222010942011-05-18T13:16:29.499-06:002011-05-18T13:16:29.499-06:00Good Questions Scotty Dog.Good Questions Scotty Dog.Bror Ericksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06913133289813136695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8261814012053869943.post-46386996987786831102011-05-18T12:30:06.661-06:002011-05-18T12:30:06.661-06:00(What do Mormons do with John, this Gospel seems t...(What do Mormons do with John, this Gospel seems to be a preemptive strike against Mormonism) <br /><br />What they do with the the book of John is best illustrated by Joseph smith's "Inspired" translation which starts out John by saying, "In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God." John 1:1 (JSIVB) <br /><br />The rest of the "translation" is every bit as laughable. When you point out how Joseph Smith's translation bears no resemblance to ANY Greek text, they come up with all kinds of mental gymnastics to explain it away. Ive asked them that, given JS's incompetence with Greek and equally incompetent translation of the PGP/Egyptian funerary scroll, what makes them think he may have done any better with the non-existent Reformed Egyptian of the BoM?Scottydognoreply@blogger.com