Everyone has different feelings about what is right. I thought we already established that. I have friends who are passionate about being Methodist, Presbeterian, Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist, and a few others. They have feelings for what they believe is right. It is something that works well for them. But is isn't impossible to say that they haven't tested another, as I have done.
Perhaps we are both right or wrong. But in the long run, what does it come down to? It comes down to a faith and belief in God that HE will judge us on. In Revelation 20:12, we are told that we will be judged by our works, and Ecclesiastes 12:14 adds that God will bring all works and secrets into our judgement whether they be good or evil. So does another book really matter? I believe it is an additional guide to living a good life. Is that really such a bad thing?
Not having a God is not illogical because there are a lot of people who don't believe in him, and find the belief in him illogical (as I stated above). It only seems illogical to have no God when you have a background in religion.
It is MOST correct even though there are SOME errors. It is the most complete history we have of the history of the world, customs of the Jews, and Jesus' ministry.
Anywhere there isn't much information, where the B isn't clear between A and C, anywhere that leaves you guessing what exactly is going on, or anywhere the BoM seems to clarify or give a better understanding of. Go find some areas you're not sure about.
No, that's not true. If I write a book about the history of the world before 1500 (commonly called the modern era), but switch the names of Constantine and Confucius, does that mean that every other piece of information in the book is also wrong? No. What I'm getting at is this: Neither the Bible nor the BoM are inspired books. They are translations of early writings of what God showed to his prophets. Some things were not written down in their entirety.
I know that. If you read my post properly, I used it in the right sense.
H-D