Відео

Sorry I missed it. Wanted to comment that Daniel Ortner (an attorney with a very well regarded public interest advocacy organization, so you would think he would not be such a wimp) was so insecure over the doctrinal weaknesses of contemporary Protestantism that he ... blocked me on Facebook! I mean, that's what you do if you're a 14 year old. Just so you know I am not making this up, here was the issue. N.T. Wright, an Anglican expert in the New Testament and very highly regarded in the Protestant theological community, has written exegetical works on the Pauline epistles that challenge the traditional understanding of faith and salvation. Ortner, when shown this, responded that he thought Wright's commentary was overly ornate and asserted that other theologians disagree with Wright. That was it. No effort to consider Wright's views on their merits or explaining why the other theologians' views should be preferred over Wright's. When pressed on this, Ortner abruptly cut off the conversation and used the "block" option on Facebook to avoid further discussion. So, again, who acts that way? Not a serious student of scripture, that's for sure.

I was a never-trumper in 2016 and 2020. I changed my mind when I prayerfully watched the impeachment trials. The Lord showed me how the accusers have come out to accuse without evidence and shape the public’s view to protect themselves. It is all sorcery and manipulation tactics. The elites are losing control and they freak out about it

Leave what alone? Any specific topic?

Has he gone off the rails again? Sometimes I wonder if he is ever uplifting or positive about anything.

I am a Christian! I know Mormonism/LDS is a completely false religion. I hope you will put your faith in the real God of the Bible! Come to the Father through faith in in the Son Jesus, Who will fill you with the Holy Spirit!!!!

This was recorded a while ago. Link to the YT playlist of Scripture Studies I do regularly, which people are welcome to come to. ua-cam.com/play/PLq6UHU56ks7vGm8xQXv2ZF7dQMcKC-HPn.html

My truth says it all.

Daniel's objections to the Book of Mormon amount to a "gish gallop", and are very disappointing for someone claiming to seek truth. There are rational answers for most of those objections, for anyone sincerely investigating. He also blurred a lot of things to strengthen his position. For example, debates on theological issues didn't occur "in 600 BC" but hundreds of years later...most were after Christ had come and left. Such theological issues were debated as well in the early Christian church 100-400 AD ...not just in the 19th century. The Jonathan Edwards phrases and other similarities suggest the Book of Mormon is a 19th century translation of an ancient text, using common 19th century language and idioms. The King James version likewise used the vocabulary of the translators. The KJV used words like corn, candlesticks, and unicorns..all anachronistic. The only language a translator has to work with is their own! And why be so literal? Steel may have only been the word chosen to represent something of a very strong substance.... that was the actual meaning of steel, long before our modern metallurgical definition. DNA expert Ugo Perego has explained why DNA is especially a difficult matter when no known DNA of Lehi and descendants is available for comparison, and that DNA of a small origin group could easily be assimilated over centuries. Daniel discounts the many Near Eastern aspects found in the Book of Mormon, things that Joseph simply couldn't have known. Jesus and his gospel was uniquely made known to the Nephites by prophecy and revelation. That is distinct from the old world, where it appears he was only hinted at in the Old Testament, though some believe more clear statements regarding the Messiah were removed. Daniel is never as hard on the Bible as he is on the Book of Mormon.

Lynn Ridenhour is as much a "Southern Baptist" as Warren Jeffs is a SLC Mormon (LDS).

Daniel: The Holy Spirit is in the OT. ua-cam.com/video/ua2Po-nq1m8/v-deo.html Baptism is in the Torah, even without the JST. Not to mention that leaders didn't ask John the baptist what he was doing but by what authority he was doing it by. OT and NT teaches grace and sanctification. On top of that the Bible teaches the three degrees of glory all over it, even without the JST. ua-cam.com/video/EwDvX-6KJ4E/v-deo.html Not to mention even the Bible states you are rewarded for your works. Not to mention NT also teaches endure to the end, that is a work. Yeshua condemned false teaches in the NT. And the destruction happened at Yeshua death, which even the NT shows much destruction happened at that point. And it happened during Passover which the Bible shows is a time of destroying the wicked. The Bible shows that there are books of scriptures missing, how do you not know the NT and BoM are not quoting these same missing books? Paul's teaching on charity is quoting Torah commandments, and the Hebrew word behind charity means keep the commandments. The anachronisms people claim can be found in the Eastern USA known as Heartland during the period of the BoM. Black Skin is a Hebrew idiom which is also in the Bible. Please tell me when the issues in the Book of Mormon were not issues in time. There is Israelite DNA in native Americans when you test the correct ones, if you test the wrong ones, as there are different tribes you wont find it. YHWH in the D&C does not state that all native Americans are Lamanites, it does state some are, and DNA substantiates that. The prophecy of the Roaring Lions has not happened yet, but it will, which FYI that prophecy is from the OT, which they had a copy of on the Brass Plates. Not to mention not all of Isaiah's prophecies have not happened yet, do you claim Isaiah is a false prophet? If you believe in the miracles of the Bible, you would know that YHWH can use even just 500 to conquore an army. I agree the BoM contradicts the LDS / Brighamite church on just about everything. Correct the BoM teaches against baptism for the dead in many instances and ways. Bible, BoM, D&C, Lectures on Faith, JS all teach modalism contrary to LDS / Brighamite church. Which is the most famous reason why the LDS / Brighamite church removed the LoF in 1920. JS did not remove modalism from the BoM. The king Follet discourse is very suspect and I don't believe that JS taught it, at least the way it's presented today. Not to mention the different versions of it contradict each other, and it contradicts the Book of Moses. The LDS / Brighamite church contradicting the BoM is one reason I don't believe it's not a church of YHWH. Which also contradicts the D&C on lots of subjects also, even the sections I don't believe are authentic. A J: If you host these things, I would suggest having your own statements and not simply reading someone else's statement for your own. Timothy: I agree the BoM contradicts LDS / Brighamite church. BoM does not teach the trinity nor does the Bible, the verse that people like to quote for proof of the trinity is not found in authentic Greek manuscripts. D&C also does not teach trinity, it teaches modalism as the BoM does. It's interesting that two people on the same side are stating two different things on what they see the BoM teaches on this subject. Very old Jewish commentaries on Ezeikel states it's talking about two books. Moroni 10:3-5 is not about asking if the BoM is true, it's about asking if Torah is true. ua-cam.com/video/jq2tAwRo_zM/v-deo.html Daniel: Do you believe YHWH is a respecter of persons? If you believe the way and the law changes you do.

ua-cam.com/video/k2FrLIlQCDo/v-deo.html

In sola scriptura, there's way too much error that will accompany that way of thinking, without going into deep philosophical debate.