If the Book of Mormon is true...

[_stemelbow]

Hey Jon, I don't set a guage necessarily. Whether its 50 or a thousand, the number is yet to be determined since we can't quite see as clearly as we'd like, it doesn't matter to me.

[_jon]

Hey Jon, I don't set a guage necessarily. Whether its 50 or a thousand, the number is yet to be determined since we can't quite see as clearly as we'd like, it doesn't matter to me.

Personally I would expect a divine translation to be...well...divine.
Not susceptable to the 1000's of changes that have been required to make the Book of Mormon not only read better, but actually make sense and match Mormon (current) theology. As an example, the Book of Mormon initially read that 'the Lamb was the Father', indicating (rightly or wrongly) that they were one and the same person. Obviously this has since been amended to read 'the Lamb was the Son of the Father'.
The amendments are one of the things that convince me that the Book of Mormon is the work of man, not God.

[_stemelbow]

Personally I would expect a divine translation to be...well...divine.
Not susceptable to the 1000's of changes that have been required to make the Book of Mormon not only read better, but actually make sense and match Mormon (current) theology. As an example, the Book of Mormon initially read that 'the Lamb was the Father', indicating (rightly or wrongly) that they were one and the same person. Obviously this has since been amended to read 'the Lamb was the Son of the Father'.
The amendments are one of the things that convince me that the Book of Mormon is the work of man, not God.

What can I say, jon? I never developed the same needed requirement as you. I suspect errors will persist. I even suspect it contains a few errors now. I don't consider the word divine, as you have assumed it must be. The was aided by divinity, but that does not mean man had no part in it. I hope that helps explain where I'm coming from. I see, it seems, where you are coming from--we hold different expectations.