Why is OK to harrass mormons?

[Rhyfelwyr]

This is the classical example of adhering to infallibility of a canon. What if it isn't infallible? What if someone put the word 'paradise' where there was 'world of spirits' along the multitudes of iterations of translation and copying? Does paradise equate heaven? Why then is there contradiction between this and Peter and Pauline teachings on this very subject.
Logical answer: Either the scriptures are translated wrong/tampered with or they are not interpreted right. For those adhering to the infallible canon, it would be the latter. But that raises an issue regarding your next statement:

But we have many of the texts in their original languages. People make it sound like translations are a massive source of problems for Chrisitians but in fact the differences in the original texts and the ones we've been using are tbh not very significant and don't change any single notable doctrine.

Also, there was no tension between Jesus/Peter/Paul on baptism. Naturally, Peter performed more baptisms as apostle to the Jews.

The first Sola: Sola Scriptura states:

Sola scriptura is the teaching that the Bible is the only inspired and authoritative word of God, is the only source for Christian doctrine, and is accessible to all—that is, it is perspicuous and self-interpreting.

Good intentions from the first reformators. Did they realize that this opened up for and resulted in 35 000 versions of interpretations? (35 000 is an old number. I bet there are more). The self-interpreting is not as self-interpreting anyway, now is it? Which one is the right one?

And so what if there were ten million interpretations, maybe the problem is not with the text itself, but the people interpreting it.

Still, I think the significance of the number of denominations are hyped up. Many of those churches share the same/almost identical beliefs and are only technically seperate denominations because of their geographic location. Most people are not worried about petty differences, I've been to Presbyterian, Baptist, Brethren services etc, they are all on the same tracks.

The final reformation would best hurry up. According to mainstream, we live in the last minute of the 11th hour and Jesus' return is imminent. It would be rather sad, if say the reformation was not finished and for naught and that Mormons were right all along.

I'm working on it.

Anyway we're nearly done, my 'Ultra-Protestant' (for want of a better term) take on things is picking up ground. Even go to the religious section at the TWC and you will see several posters like myself that have a fascination with removing all pagan elements from the religion and following the example of the New Testament-era church. There's me, hellas, basics, squiggle and signifer_one are nearly there (well, the last one is a pesky Arminian, but...).

It seems that what the Reformation and Protestantism really lack, is divine inspiration or visitations. Heck, even Islam claims divine origins. All that the reformation can show for are a bunch of disgruntled old men re-interpreting a book slaughtered by centuries of copying and translations. All done by a Church the reformators say are corrupt. To trust that a corrupt church didn't change things in the canon to fit with their evil agenda is... blue-eyed?

But Protestantism isn't all about the great superstitions surrounding other religions, it is very rationalistic and materialistic. The existence of God is just seen as a fact of reality (or something), the perfection of the scriptures is seen as self-evident. And as I said, the canon was formed by consensus amongst the very earliest followers of Christ, and we have the texts in the original languages, so...