PDA

View Full Version : Joseph smith was the only witness to the bom



Christian
01-21-2014, 06:02 PM
Nobody else ever even peeked at the CONTENT of that book but joe smith. smith was the only one who could 'testify' that the content of the book of mormon was anything OTHER THAN FICTION. And of course like most of his stuff, nobody could 'check' him. He and he alone made up the mormon religion.

Agree or disagree? Comments?

in the Name of Jesus Christ,
morefish

James Banta
01-21-2014, 07:59 PM
Nobody else ever even peeked at the CONTENT of that book but joe smith. smith was the only one who could 'testify' that the content of the book of mormon was anything OTHER THAN FICTION. And of course like most of his stuff, nobody could 'check' him. He and he alone made up the mormon religion.

Agree or disagree? Comments?

in the Name of Jesus Christ,
morefish

Wow does that ever ring as the truth.. Smith's mother noted Joseph's storytelling ability and interest in the Indians. She wrote

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them." (Lucy Smith, Biographical Sketches, p. 85).. That's right he was formulating the story long before he was given Golden plates. It is clear that the whole of the BofM was more imagination and less inspiration than anything ever taught by a Christian teacher.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-21-2014, 09:58 PM
Nobody else ever even peeked at the CONTENT of that book but joe smith.
Actually, millions have not only peeked at the content, but studied it carefully.


smith was the only one who could 'testify' that the content of the book of mormon was anything OTHER THAN FICTION.
Actually, millions can and do testify of its truthfulness.


And of course like most of his stuff, nobody could 'check' him.
Actually, millions have 'checked' him, and received independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit.

Christian
01-22-2014, 02:11 AM
erunder posted:
Actually, millions have not only peeked at the content, but studied it carefully.

Not in the original plates (if any such plates really existed).

Actually, millions can and do testify of its truthfulness.

We are all aware of the inflated numbers of the mormons. A close friend of mine left the mormon church, a few years later became an ELDER in a LUTHERAN CHURCH, was an elder in the Lutheran church for 14 years before the mormon religion sent him a letter telling him he was no longer a member. That was over 17 YEARS after he had left. When he left he asked that his name be reoved from the roles. It took SEVENTEEN YEARS before they got that done!

And of course NOT ONE OF THOSE SUPPOSED 'millions' can HONESTLY TESTIFY that the bom depicts anything OTHER THAN THE FANTASY STORY-TELLING OF JOE SMITH.

Actually, millions have 'checked' him, and received independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps of SOME spirit, but the Holy Spirit of GOD has shown us CHRISTIANS the contradictions between joey smith's writings and the BIBLE (which IS from God).

I can personally testify that your book is phoney and NOT OF GOD.

In the Name of the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ (not the demon-spirit-brother-of-satan-'jesus' of mormonism),
morefish

James Banta
01-22-2014, 09:15 AM
Actually, millions have 'checked' him, and received independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit.


Calling an emotional experience a confirmation from God the Holy Spirit is a reach.. When Jesus walked with the disciples after the resurrection, did He not teach them from the scriptures? He didn't pull out some new wild eyed teaching and ask them to believe that. No the same scriptures that was given through the prophet Moses was opened to them.. If you can't see truth in the Bible and need garbage like the BofM, the D&C, and the PofPG you will never have a real confirmation from Holy Spirit on anything. Such a confirmation can only come through the scriptures, THE BIBLE.. That is the pattern established in the Luke 24:32.. It is a pattern that mormonism rejects by twisting what is taught to their own purposes. Only in having the SCRIPTURES opened to them was there a spiritual confirmation from God.. You can take your Chubby Checkers approach to spiritual confirmation and use it on those so spiritually dead that all they can base discernment on it what seem right to a man (Proverbs 14:12).. IHS jim

Erundur
01-22-2014, 03:52 PM
Not in the original plates (if any such plates really existed).
Okay, if you want to move the goal posts and talk about the original plates, then at least twelve people saw them.


And of course NOT ONE OF THOSE SUPPOSED 'millions' can HONESTLY TESTIFY that the bom depicts anything OTHER THAN THE FANTASY STORY-TELLING OF JOE SMITH.
...
Perhaps of SOME spirit, but the Holy Spirit of GOD has shown us CHRISTIANS the contradictions between joey smith's writings and the BIBLE (which IS from God).
Worthless anti-Mormon RHETORIC.

Erundur
01-22-2014, 03:53 PM
Calling an emotional experience a confirmation from God the Holy Spirit is a reach..
Then stop doing it.

James Banta
01-23-2014, 08:37 AM
Then stop doing it.

I did over 30 years ago.. When will you stop it? IHS jim

James Banta
01-23-2014, 09:16 AM
Okay, if you want to move the goal posts and talk about the original plates, then at least twelve people saw them.


Worthless anti-Mormon RHETORIC.

A person must remember that it wasn't the witnesses that wrote the testimony they signed That was all penned by Smith and under pressure was signed by the witnesses.. Other "prophets" did the same thing in support of their "spiritual gifts".

The Strangite witnesses bore their testimony.[1] In a manner clearly intended to replicate the Three and the Eight Witnesses to the Book of Mormon, J. J. Strang produced four witnesses who testified that they themselves had dug the Voree Plates from the ground where he said that they would be discovered. Their detailed written testimony was used by Strang in the Voree Herald, January 1846; Zion's Reveille, 1 April 1847; and Gospel Herald, 4 May 1848 (http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Witnesses/Strangite_parallels)

A full copy of their witness is given on that same web sit..

Strang had a total of seven witnesses to his "prophetic work" they were Samuel Graham, Samuel P. Bacon, Warren Post, Phineas Wright, Albert N. Hosmer, Ebenezer Page and Jehiel Savage. While I have seen accusations that some of these men denied their testimony no real proof that was ever offered that any one of them denied their testimony.. Sound familiar? IHS jim

Erundur
01-23-2014, 10:15 AM
When will you stop it?
Perhaps you can show where I've ever done that. No, of course you can't, this is just a distraction to divert attention from the fact that the OP has been proven wrong.

Erundur
01-23-2014, 10:19 AM
A person must remember that it wasn't the witnesses that wrote the testimony they signed
A person must remember that regardless of who wrote the statement, they all signed it and stood by their testimony even when they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by denying it.

RealFakeHair
01-23-2014, 11:16 AM
The first rule in the book of magician is to never let the audience see how you perform your trick.
Remember LDSinc. T.B.M.s the Wizard of Oz hid behind the curtain.
Joseph Smith jr. Also a wizard hid behind a curtain.

neverending
01-23-2014, 02:52 PM
Actually, millions have not only peeked at the content, but studied it carefully.


Actually, millions can and do testify of its truthfulness.


Actually, millions have 'checked' him, and received independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit.

And millions have been deceived. The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations. Why would they do that if what they witnessed were true? Even J. Smith ended up calling the witnesses, liars etc. Seems those men realized that what they were doing was wrong. Have you ever thought that Satan and his minions can fool people causing them to feel things that are wrong? Isn't it Satan's *** to keep people from God? Who is right? I know without a doubt that the Holy Spirit spoke to me while I was in one of your temples being married. Why would the Holy Spirit tell me to get up, leave, you do not belong here? Is it a good idea to follow feelings?

James Banta
01-23-2014, 03:19 PM
A person must remember that regardless of who wrote the statement, they all signed it and stood by their testimony even when they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by denying it.


Just like the witnesses to James Strang did. Because of that was his work truthful? After all his followers also had a witness they believed was from God the Holy Spirit.. Instead of looking for an outside witness why not look to the scripture like Jesus did as he taught the men along the road after the resurrection (Luke 24:32)? Stop looking for something New and set your sights on Jesus and the scriptures for the truth.. IHS jim

James Banta
01-23-2014, 03:49 PM
Perhaps you can show where I've ever done that. No, of course you can't, this is just a distraction to divert attention from the fact that the OP has been proven wrong.

Has it now? Did you show that Smith saw the Father according to the 1832 version of the first vision? In that version didn't Jesus introduce Himself? Was it the world that Jesus condemned in that version or was it the Christian Church? Was there anyone besides Smith present in either of those testimonies that could add their witness to Smith's? I guess then the OP stands.. Joseph Smith is the ONLY witness that mormonism is of God.. Do you remember this statement from Joseph Fielding Smith?

Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground. (Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, Bookcraft, 1954, vol. 1, p. 188)

From this statement htat there is no middle ground and Smith's other testimonies of the First vision it looks like the OP is proven not debunked..

As far as looking for something from the Holy Spirit outside the scripture is a common trait of yours.. This this very exchange you said "Actually, millions have 'checked' him, and received independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit." Instead of looking for God's truth in His word you are saying that look for an independent confirmation from the Holy Spirit.. Never did Jesus teach independent confirmation of anything.. It was always through His word.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-23-2014, 05:45 PM
The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations.
Now you know that's not true...don't you?

neverending
01-23-2014, 08:04 PM
[QUOTE=Erundur;152155]Now you know that's not true.

Unfortunately, it is you who doesn't know the truth and you fail to ever show me where I am wrong. Easy to say, "your lying or that isn't true." It takes guts to actually look for evidence to prove that what I've posted is untrue. It would take you to do some research but I don't think you want to take the time. Please read this:

"After the Mormons were driven from Independence, Missouri, in the early 1830's, Smith instructed the church members not to sell their property with the hope that they could still reclaim the land. However, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery went against this edict. Kenneth Winn explained:
Cowdery was particularly nettled over the church's presuming to dictate how he used his property. . . . The dissenters' avowal that their individual freedom should take precedence over the judgment of church authorities made active conflict inevitable. Nor was it long in coming. In January [1838], against policy, William Phelps, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer sold their land in Jackson County. . . . Accordingly, on April 12, the Missouri High Council charged David and John Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Lyman Johnson with various counts of dereliction of duty, violation of church policy, and disrespect for the church leadership and cut them off from the church.
In Kirtland, Ohio, Joseph Smith and the leaders had become embroiled in land speculation, borrowing large amounts of money and starting their own bank.
http://www.utlm.org/images/newsletters/117/117kirtland3dollarbill.jpg
Kirtland Bank Note

When the bank failed, the economy collapsed and the creditors started demanding payment, many lost faith in Joseph's prophetic leadership. Apostle George A. Smith related the following:
After the organization of the Twelve Apostles, the spirit of apostacy became more general. . . . One of the First Presidency, several of the Twelve Apostles, High Council, Presidents of Seventies, the witnesses of the Book of Mormon, Presidents of Far West, and a number of others standing high in the Church were all carried away in this apostacy . . .
While George A. Smith didn't specify the names of the witnesses, we know that Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery had all left the LDS Church by 1838. In fact, the LDS leaders published an attack on the character of Martin Harris in The Elders' Journal, a Mormon publication edited by Joseph Smith. The article charged that Harris and others were guilty of "swearing, lying, cheating, swindling, drinking, with every species of debauchery." Martin Harris, in turn, accused Joseph Smith of "lying and licentiousness."
In a letter dated December 16, 1838, Joseph Smith said that "John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris are too mean to mention. (History of the Church, vol. 3, p. 232.) Smith specifically singled out David Whitmer:
God suffered such kind of beings to afflict ***. . . . This poor man [William E. McLellin] who professes to be much of a prophet, has no other dumb *** to ride but David Whitmer, to forbid his madness when he goes up to curse Israel; and this *** not being of the same kind as Balaam's, . . . he brays out cursings instead of blessings. Poor ***!
Before driving the dissenters from Far West, Missouri, the Mormons wrote them a very threatening letter. In this letter the dissenters were accused of stealing, lying and counterfeiting:
Whereas the citizens of Caldwell county have borne with the abuse received from you at different times, . . . until it is no longer to be endured; . . . out of the county you shall go, . . . depart, depart, or a more fatal calamity shall befall you.
After Oliver Cowdery had been taken by a State warrant for stealing, and the stolen property found . . . in which nefarious transaction John Whitmer had also participated. Oliver Cowdery stole the property, conveyed it to John Whitmer . . . Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Lyman E. Johnson, united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive, cheat, and defraud the saints out of their property. . . .
During the full career of Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer's bogus money business, it got abroad into the world that they were engaged in it. . . . We have evidence of a very strong character that you are at this very time engaged with a gang of counterfeiters, coiners, and blacklegs, . . . we will put you from the county of Caldwell: so help us God.
The dissenters, fearing for their lives, fled Far West, leaving their families behind. Fawn Brodie tells of their hardship:
Upon receiving this ultimatum the two Whitmers, with Oliver Cowdery and Lyman Johnson, set out for Clay County to hire a gentile lawyer. When they returned from Liberty, they met their families on the road, bearing a tale of Danite [a secret Mormon vigilante group] persecution that the men could not believe possible as coming from their former brethren. The Danites had surrounded their homes, ordered their wives to pack their blankets and leave the county immediately, and threatened death to anyone who returned to Far West. They had been robbed, according to John Whitmer, of all their goods save bedding and clothes.

Writing in 1887, David Whitmer explained why he had left the church:
If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to "separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them."
In the spring of 1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had gone deep into error and blindness. . . . About the same time that I came out, the Spirit of God moved upon quite a number of the brethren who came out, with their families, all of the eight witnesses who were then living (except the three Smiths) came out; Peter and Christian Whitmer were dead. Oliver Cowdery came out also. Martin Harris was then in Ohio. The church went deeper and deeper into wickedness." "David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ (Richmond, Missouri, 1887), pp. 27-28 (http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/address2.htm#27)."

I am sorry but this is the truth of it. It would be good for you to read your own Church History.

Erundur
01-23-2014, 08:10 PM
Unfortunately, it is you who doesn't know the truth
Then educate me. When did Joseph Smith, Sr. leave the church and which denomination did he join?

neverending
01-23-2014, 08:14 PM
Then educate me. When did Joseph Smith, Sr. leave the church and which denomination did he join?

I can see that you didn't read all that I posted. If you had you would have read that the 3 Smith's were the ONLY ones who didn't leave the church. It should bother you that the 3 main witnesses, and the final 8 ALL left the church. Men who testified to the truth of the BoM, men who said they held the plates and saw an angel. It should bother you how quickly Smith turned against these men who were once his friends. If you want to continue believing in lies, that is up to you.

Erundur
01-23-2014, 08:35 PM
Has it now?
It has, since you guys have been unable to support your position.


Did you show that Smith saw the Father according to the 1832 version of the first vision?
This thread isn't about the first vision. When I said the OP has been proven wrong, I was referring to the OP of this thread.

Erundur
01-23-2014, 08:42 PM
I can see that you didn't read all that I posted.
This is what I read:


The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations.
Is this statement true or false?

BTW, I tend not to read long, off-topic sermons.

James Banta
01-24-2014, 01:24 PM
[Erundur;152166]It has, since you guys have been unable to support your position.

Was Smith the only one in the grove that saw God? That is a testimony of one.. Did anyone besides Smith read the plates and see that the translation was accurate? The answer to both is NO... Smith then is the only witness to the BofM.. No one else beside Smith was given a translation.. That is unbiblical where by the testimony or 2 or three all truth is established (2 Corinthians 13:1).. By being the only witness of the BofM Smith ignored that p***age. He wasn't the last time he would ignore the teachings of the Bible in his teachings..


This thread isn't about the first vision. When I said the OP has been proven wrong, I was referring to the OP of this thread.

Both are the same neither one has the required Biblical witness.. You can point to Paul but was he teaching something other than what the Church had already been taught? NO! So His vision was to bring Him to Jesus. To point out that he was persecuting Him by his persecution of the Church and not to get a commission to give the Church a new birth.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-24-2014, 02:48 PM
Smith then is the only witness to the BofM..
That's false. At least eleven others saw the plates.

RealFakeHair
01-24-2014, 03:00 PM
That's false. At least eleven others saw the plates.

Overview of Critics' positionThe witnesses, by their own admission, seemed to have only seen the angel and plates in a 'visionary state' in their minds as Joseph suggested to them and not really with their natural eyes as members are taught. Why would real, metal plates need to be seen in a vision or with 'spiritual eyes' as many of the witnesses later testified?

Critics also point out several issues that call into question the witnesses' reliability and trustworthiness. For example, all the witnesses had close ties to Joseph and his family. Martin Harris, had a substantial financial stake in the success of the Book of Mormon. Moreover, in the upcoming years, many of the witnesses ended up leaving the church and following other leaders and religions. By 1847, not one of the surviving eleven witnesses was part of the LDS Church. If they believed

neverending
01-24-2014, 03:28 PM
This is what I read:


Is this statement true or false?

BTW, I tend not to read long, off-topic sermons.

That is unfortunate and tells me that you don't listen during sacrament meetings either. And how was what I posted, off-topic? Many have been talking about the witnesses.
My statement stands for it is a known fact that the witnesses to your BoM other then JS's father and his two brothers ALL left the church. Men who were once close friends of JS became his enemies within a heart beat. JS calling them all kinds of filthy names. So, if these men truly had seen the plates then today their testimonies mean nothing. Martin Harris had the most to lose since he was counting on the BoM to sell many copies which would make him rich....we know that didn't happen. If people are going to take the time to comment here, it is only right and decent if people read what has been posted. If you have no desire to read and to find the truth, then I say, you don't belong here. You have never offered ANYTHING of value to this site. Not one scripture verse to defend Mormonism. Only that anything I've posted or James, or Apologette or Real Fake Hair is false or we are liars. How easy to scream these things but not defend anything. I am tired of your whining.

Erundur
01-24-2014, 03:46 PM
My statement stands for it is a known fact that the witnesses to your BoM other then JS's father and his two brothers ALL left the church.
If that is a fact, then your statement is false.


So, if these men truly had seen the plates then today their testimonies mean nothing.
False. This is a non sequitur.


I am tired of your whining.
You say, at the end of a paragraph of whining, LOL.

RealFakeHair
01-24-2014, 03:51 PM
If that is a fact, then your statement is false.


False. This is a non sequitur.

You say, at the end of a paragraph of whining, LOL.
Non-LDSinc. You are charging windmills with this Ostridge!

neverending
01-24-2014, 04:57 PM
If that is a fact, then your statement is false.


False. This is a non sequitur.


You say, at the end of a paragraph of whining, LOL.

Did you read what you wrote? If something is FACT, that makes it TRUE!! You little sentence is so contradictory it is sad :( This whole thing on the witnesses to the BoM is found within your own Church History.
"LDS Apostle John A. Widtsoe said that the eleven men who testified to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon had "spotless reputations" (Joseph Smith—Seeker After Truth, p. 338). Non-Mormons, on the other hand, have made many serious charges against the witnesses. Some of the most damaging statements against the Book of Mormon witnesses, however, came from the pen of Joseph Smith and other early Mormon leaders.
In fact, after Martin lost the first 116 pages of the Book of Mormon m****cript, Joseph Smith gave a revelation in July of 1828 in which Martin Harris was called a "wicked man," who "has set at naught the counsels of God, and has broken the most sacred promises" (Doctrine and Covenants 3:12-13). In another revelation given sometime later, God was supposed to have told Joseph Smith that Harris "is a wicked man, for he has sought to take away the things wherewith you have been entrusted; and he has also sought to destroy your gift" (D&C 10:7)." Seems there were many problems that later occurred with the witnesses. This being one example. Martin Harris was a close and trusted friend to Joseph Smith til the 116 pages were lost and then the tide turned and turn it did for as you can read, JS called Martin Harris a "wicked man."

The relationship became so bad that JS ended up calling the three witnesses some horrible names. "While George A. Smith didn't specify the names of the witnesses, we know that Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery had all left the LDS Church by 1838. In fact, the LDS leaders published an attack on the character of Martin Harris in The Elders' Journal, a Mormon publication edited by Joseph Smith. The article charged that Harris and others were guilty of "swearing, lying, cheating, swindling, drinking, with every species of debauchery." Martin Harris, in turn, accused Joseph Smith of "lying and licentiousness. (John C. Bennett, History of the Saints (http://www.utlm.org/booklist/***les/historyofthesaints_ub011.htm) (Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842), "Testimony of Fanny Brewer," p. 85.)
I will leave it at these statements since you've admitted that you don't read long sermons. These statements are FACT erundur! Do you want to disagree with your leaders and your own Church History and publications?

Erundur
01-24-2014, 05:46 PM
Did you read what you wrote? If something is FACT, that makes it TRUE!! You little sentence is so contradictory it is sad :(
<facepalm> There is no contradiction in my sentence. Here's what's sad:

Your statement #1: "The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations."
Your statement #2: "[T]he 3 Smith's (sic) were the ONLY ones who didn't leave the church."

It is impossible for both statements to be true, yet you espouse both simultaneously, and don't even see it!

James Banta
01-24-2014, 06:12 PM
That's false. At least eleven others saw the plates.

Come now I didn't say anything about seeing them.. I said that Smith was the only witness that his translation was accurate.. At the time there was not wide knowledge of the Rosetta Stone, but because the writings were not actually in Egyptian but is a coded form he called Reformed Egyptian, the stone wouldn't have helped anyway. Reformed Egyptian was said to be a shorthand language used by the Arabian traders to deal with each other without exposing the contents of their caravans to those who may have had evil intentions toward the wealth of these traders. However no such language or Script that matches up with any of the descriptions or examples of the language that Smith has provided has ever been found (Andrew Robinson, Lost Languages: The Enigma of the World's Undeciphered Scripts (New York: McGraw Hill, 2002))..

Yes we have 11 signatures said to have been from 11 men of honesty and of good standing in the community. The Strangite movement says the same thing about their plates.. I believe their witnesses just as much as I believe yours.. The thing is why don't you believe those witnesses.. they are just as believable and Smith's witnesses.. There there are the problems with the testimonies of Martin Harris confessing he didn't see the angle or the plates with his natural eyes but with the eyes of faith.. I don't doubt that he had his emotions worked up by the promptings of Smith, Cowdery, and Witmer to the point he had some emotional experience.. There are other questions about the veracity of the eight witnesses.. Still Smith and Smith alone is the witness of the contents of the plates.. God did ask the people to believe blindly in Moses. He spoke the Law out of heaven to all the people, he made them all to hear His voice (Deut 4:36).. Yet God gave only Smith the opportunity to get the physical ***urance that the BofM was His actual His message. Smith is the ONLY witness that the BofM is what it purports it's self to be.. And you haven't even tried to answer that.. IHS jim

neverending
01-24-2014, 06:15 PM
<facepalm> There is no contradiction in my sentence. Here's what's sad:

Your statement #1: "The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations."
Your statement #2: "[T]he 3 Smith's (sic) were the ONLY ones who didn't leave the church."

It is impossible for both statements to be true, yet you espouse both simultaneously, and don't even see it!


DON'T GIVE ME YOUR SNOTTY FACEPALM DISRESPECT! How old did you say you were? I say you're young and have much to learn! And this disrespect only proves it. Doing that is childish for it was something my daughter would do when she was 14. Time to grow up don't you think?

If you would care to read more thoroughly, you would have seen where I said in my post that all but the Smith's stayed with the Church. So, I guess for you, because you've already admitted you don't read long sermons etc. that I should have been more clear and edited my post. EXCUSE ME!!!! It still doesn't bode well for the witnesses though does it? I could care less that JS's father and two brothers remained in the Church, after all, they were family. What we do know is that after JS was killed, his son Joseph Smith the third started the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ. There are however some significant differences, such as, the Reorganized believes in the Trinity, and only use the 1830 & 1837 additions of the BoM. They don't do the Masonic rituals in their temple, they believe in a paid ministry, and allow women the Priesthood. They don't believe baptism is required for salvation. They don't rely on JS's translation of the Bible. They continue to add to the D&C and are up to Section 164 and this new section was just added in 2010. So get over yourself, ok?

nrajeffreturns
01-24-2014, 07:18 PM
So, to clarify:

ARE both statements true?

Your statement #1: "The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations."

Your statement #2: "[T]he 3 Smith's (sic) were the ONLY ones who didn't leave the church."

nrajeffreturns
01-24-2014, 07:19 PM
Was Smith the only one in the grove that saw God?

No, he was not the only one: Jesus was there, too, and He saw God. (It would be hard for Jesus NOT to see Him, since Jesus was standing directly to His right) :cool:;):p

Erundur
01-24-2014, 08:11 PM
Come now I didn't say anything about seeing them.. I said that Smith was the only witness that his translation was accurate..
And then you said, "Smith then is the only witness to the BofM.." which is a false statement.


Yes we have 11 signatures said to have been from 11 men of honesty and of good standing in the community. The Strangite movement says the same thing about their plates.. I believe their witnesses just as much as I believe yours.. The thing is why don't you believe those witnesses..
Who told you I don't believe those witnesses? (What did they actually say?)


There there are the problems with the testimonies of Martin Harris confessing he didn't see the angle or the plates with his natural eyes but with the eyes of faith..
Which you interpret to mean he didn't really see them, but your interpretation is doubtful because Whitmer stated very clearly that he literally saw them with his eyes.


Still Smith and Smith alone is the witness of the contents of the plates..
Wrong again. The three witnesses said, "And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."


Smith is the ONLY witness that the BofM is what it purports it's self to be.. And you haven't even tried to answer that..
<facepalm> I've been answering that for three days.

Erundur
01-24-2014, 08:18 PM
DON'T GIVE ME YOUR SNOTTY FACEPALM DISRESPECT!
Don't give me a reason to.


How old did you say you were?
I didn't.


I say you're young and have much to learn!
Did your discernment powers tell you that?


If you would care to read more thoroughly, you would have seen where I said in my post that all but the Smith's stayed with the Church.
Which would mean that your original statement, "The 11 witnesses who signed their names to the BoM ALL later left the church and joined other denominations" is false, which is what I was objecting to in the first place! But you just changed your position and tried to pretend that's what you had been claiming all along. If you still can't see that, then I'm afraid there will be many more facepalm moments in this thread.

dberrie2000
01-25-2014, 05:35 AM
I can see that you didn't read all that I posted. If you had you would have read that the 3 Smith's were the ONLY ones who didn't leave the church. It should bother you that the 3 main witnesses, and the final 8 ALL left the church.

That is simply not true. Where do you get this information from?

Of the 3 witnesses--all of them left the church for a time--but two of them rejoined the church and died therein. One remained outside of the church until death. Not all of the eight left the church, obviously--but some remained faithful to the end.

James Banta
01-25-2014, 03:01 PM
That is simply not true. Where do you get this information from?

Of the 3 witnesses--all of them left the church for a time--but two of them rejoined the church and died therein. One remained outside of the church until death. Not all of the eight left the church, obviously--but some remained faithful to the end.

You are right that some remained faithful.. The Smiths remained faithful the Whitmers were either dead or felt betrayed by the Smith's in 1838 and split from the Church, But even a Smith conveyed to his son that he had never really seen the plates of the Book of Mormon.. William Smith said his father never saw the plates except under a frock. And Stephen Burnett quotes Martin Harris that "the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument [their testimony published in the Book of Mormon] for that reason, but were persuaded to do it ("Brodie Revisited: A Reappraisal," by Marvin S. Hill, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 83-85). Further reinforcing the position that the eight witnesses never saw the actual plates, except for a possible vision, is the following statement of Martin Harris. "These plates were usually kept in a cherry box made for that purpose in the possession of Joseph and myself. The plates were kept from the sight of the world, and no one, save Oliver Cowdery, myself, Joseph Smith, Jr., and David Whitmer, ever saw them" (Early Mormon Documents, vol. 2, p. 306). Of the eight witnesses who remained alive by late 1838 only the Smiths were true to their testimony and one of the Smiths doubted his.. IHS jim

Christian
01-30-2014, 08:29 AM
Nobody else ever even peeked at the CONTENT of that book but joe smith. smith was the only one who could 'testify' that the content of the book of mormon was anything OTHER THAN FICTION. And of course like most of his stuff, nobody could 'check' him. He and he alone made up the mormon religion.

Agree or disagree? Comments?

in the Name of Jesus Christ,
morefish

STILL NO OTHER WITNESSES THAN JOE SMITH found for the TEXT of the book of mormon.

I guess they are not up to it.

in the Name of the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ (not smith's demonic invented jesus),
morefish

Erundur
01-30-2014, 10:14 AM
STILL NO OTHER WITNESSES THAN JOE SMITH found for the TEXT of the book of mormon.
Actually, there are at least three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon:

"And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harris

alanmolstad
01-30-2014, 10:24 AM
- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harrisare these the same 3 guys that dberrie was talking about above?

Erundur
01-30-2014, 10:41 AM
are these the same 3 guys that dberrie was talking about above?
Yep, that's them.

James Banta
01-30-2014, 12:26 PM
Actually, there are at least three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon:

"And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harris

Not one of these men could read the characters of the Plates Smith said he translated into English. The only witness that the translation is correct is Smith.. So we have the testimony of one man that what is called the BofM today is what was written on the plates.. No if you care to be honest go back an read what was being said here.. No one said that the plates were testified as being seen by others.. No, it was the text that we call into question of being the correct translation.. May may have been told the translation was correct but with their own eyes and by their own knowledge one Smith could know that.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-30-2014, 01:03 PM
Not one of these men could read the characters of the Plates Smith said he translated into English.
That doesn't change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon.


No one said that the plates were testified as being seen by others..
But of course they were.


May may have been told the translation was correct but with their own eyes and by their own knowledge one Smith could know that..
Unless one trusts God.

alanmolstad
01-30-2014, 01:16 PM
......No one said that the plates were testified as being seen by others...


In the end, I dont think we should even care how many people claimed to have seen in-person the golden plates.
From my point of view it would not matter to me even a little bit that the Mormons had a whole choir list of names that they say now saw the plates in person.

To me that whole issue is a moot point.

The only thing that is important to me is NOT how many they say saw the plates, but rather what they say the plates taught!

It does not matter what is claimed of the plates, if what is being taught was on them goes against the Faith of the Christian Church as shown at Jude1:3

And on top of this, we in the christian Church was specifically warned in the Holy Bible about the false message message told by the Mormons.
We have already our marching orders....there is no need now to even debate over this issue made so clear to us at 2nd corth 11:14

Phoenix
01-30-2014, 01:27 PM
Actually, there are at least three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon:

"And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harris

That point is probably more salient than some people here realize. If you have 3 men testifying that they were eyewitnesses (or at least ear-witnesses) to God declaring something, then such an event becomes as verifiable as (or even more verifiable than) some events that are found in the Bible.

Take for example Moses' claim that God appeared to him and spoke with him on some mountain. How many witnesses to that event were there, to back up Moses' claim? Don't all of us in Judeo-Christendom take Moses' word for it that things happened just like he claimed they happened?

So anyone who accepts Moses' claim about having a conversation with God, doesn't leave himself much room to attack the claim that there's evidence that God approved of the BOM and its translation.

RealFakeHair
01-30-2014, 01:36 PM
That point is probably more salient than some people here realize. If you have 3 men testifying that they were eyewitnesses (or at least ear-witnesses) to God declaring something, then such an event becomes as verifiable as (or even more verifiable than) some events that are found in the Bible.

Take for example Moses' claim that God appeared to him and spoke with him on some mountain. How many witnesses to that event were there, to back up Moses' claim? Don't all of us in Judeo-Christendom take Moses' word for it that things happened just like he claimed they happened?

So anyone who accepts Moses' claim about having a conversation with God, doesn't leave himself much room to attack the claim that there's evidence that God approved of the BOM and its translation.

So, if I find 4 witnesses to the fact the Book of Mormon is a fairy-tail it would over rule the 3 wintesses to Joseph Smith jr. Imaginary mind?

alanmolstad
01-30-2014, 01:46 PM
So once again, it does not matter to me personally the number of people the Mormons now claim to have seen this or that.

The Mormon's claim becomes a moot point when you look at the warning we received at Galatians 1:8

RealFakeHair
01-30-2014, 02:07 PM
So once again, it does not matter to me personally the number of people the Mormons now claim to have seen this or that.

The Mormon's claim becomes a moot point when you look at the warning we received at Galatians 1:8

One thing we know about the LDSinc. There is NO there, there!

James Banta
01-30-2014, 04:44 PM
[Erundur;152278]That doesn't change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon.

Of course it does.. They had no first hand knowledge of what was on the plates.. To them the translation was what ever Smith told them it was.. Unlike a Biblical translation where many men could read the original language and correct a false translation. There were witness of only what Smith told them not of the translation..


But of course they were.

So what parts of the BofM did Martin Harris translate? Maybe he retranslated a portion that Smith had already completed showing a concurrence with Smith's work? I can tell you that He nor any of the other witnesses were ever given a word of the translation through anything that the LDS might call a Urim and Thummim..


Unless one trusts God.

More like if you trust God you would accept what He preserved for us and not go around looking for something new.. The BofM is new. It have only been around since 1830.. try trusting God that He promised that His word would continue even if Heaven and earth p***ed away.. You don't need new stories to testify of Jesus.. There are many testimonies in the NT that Jesus is the Christ.. Believe God there first, then come to me and explain why another testament is needed.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-30-2014, 05:33 PM
They had no first hand knowledge of what was on the plates.. To them the translation was what ever Smith told them it was..
And they knew the translation was true because the voice of God told them.


So what parts of the BofM did Martin Harris translate? Maybe he retranslated a portion that Smith had already completed showing a concurrence with Smith's work? I can tell you that He nor any of the other witnesses were ever given a word of the translation through anything that the LDS might call a Urim and Thummim..
What are you talking about? The plates were testified as being seen by eleven others, and people have certainly said that, contrary to your ***ertion.


More like if you trust God you would accept what He preserved for us and not go around looking for something new..
Is that what you would have told the first century saints regarding the books of the New Testament?


The BofM is new. It have only been around since 1830..
Then give me the date when it will no longer be new and I can start believing it.


try trusting God that He promised that His word would continue even if Heaven and earth p***ed away.. You don't need new stories to testify of Jesus.. There are many testimonies in the NT that Jesus is the Christ.. Believe God there first, then come to me and explain why another testament is needed..
"And because my words shall hiss forth—many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible.
...
"Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.

"And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.

"Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written."

RealFakeHair
01-31-2014, 09:31 AM
Last night on one of the TV channels there was a progam on who discovered America before Columbus?
There were the Vikings, Irish, polynesias, lost trib of Israel, and then came to book of mormon. The part about the Book of Mormon part of the progam lasted about 10 seconds. Why? Because there is no there there.

James Banta
01-31-2014, 10:22 AM
[Erundur;152285]And they knew the translation was true because the voice of God told them.

They knew the translation was correct because Joseph Smith told them it was correct and if they ask God he would give them that ***urance. They felt it was correct, they believed it was correct. They had no knowledge that it was correct..


What are you talking about? The plates were testified as being seen by eleven others, and people have certainly said that, contrary to your ***ertion.
In this discussion I am not going to question whether the plates were real or not.. I am saying that no one other than Smith translated or could translate a word of the text of the BofM.. So when I asked "what parts of the BofM did Martin Harris translate? Maybe he retranslated a portion that Smith had already completed showing a concurrence with Smith's work? I can tell you that He nor any of the other witnesses were ever given a word of the translation through anything that the LDS might call a Urim and Thummim.." I was not questioning whether anyone saw them but the translation of the plates.. There were and still are many scholars that can translate the original languages that both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible are written in. But in spite of ***urances from Dr Nibley, of BYU, no one in the world has ever been able to translate a word of the sample of the writings that Smith was said to have sent to Dr Anthon. Dr Nibley, who is thought to be one of the LDS church's greatest anthropologists said that the characters were decipherable. (The Provo Herald, May 1, 1980). Later that month Dr Nibley again insisted that "I still say just what I said before. It can be translated.". We all know now that the find of the Anthon paper was a fraud. A fraud that fooled even the best scholars that the LDS church has.. To say the least not one character of any of the "reformed Egyptian" Smith said the BofM was derived has been translated by anyone other then Smith is a clear falsehood.. To say that anyone besides Smith ever made such a translation is a lie..


Is that what you would have told the first century saints regarding the books of the New Testament?

Is any part of the Bible the work of one man? Even the Children of Israel heard God speak to them from Sinai. Seventy of the Elders of the people accompanied Moses up onto the mountain where God made it clear to them that Moses had been called as the Lord's prophet. Did God ever do such a thing for Smith? Did Jesus ever appear to any of the elders of mormonism and make it clear Smith had been called to be His prophet? Has any of the BofM's original language ever been translated by anyone but Smith? NO! It is a one man show.. A secret and Jesus told us that in secret He does nothing (John 18:20).


Then give me the date when it will no longer be new and I can start believing it.

As long as it teaches a different Gospel, A gospel of grace available to mankind only after they have done all they can do, it will never be believable.



And because my words shall hiss forth—many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible.
...
"Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.
"
"And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.

"Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written."

And why did Smith make such a proclamation? Because that was the reception that his stories were receiving from the people that had heard his wild tales for all the years they had known him. Most of the BofM is doctrinally fine.. It is a novel like the "Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe", Just not as well written" There is a lot of Biblical truth within it.. But Like all novels it is the work of a man. It is not God breathed as is the Bible.. Come back and tell me what a great work of God Smith did in bringing the BofM to the world after you show me where it teaches mormon doctrine. After you show me that it teaches that The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God (2 Nephi 31:21). Or that it insists that God is One (Alma 11:26-29). When you start agreeing with your own scripture then ask me again when you can believe it.. IHS jim

Erundur
01-31-2014, 11:27 AM
They knew the translation was correct because Joseph Smith told them it was correct and if they ask God he would give them that ***urance. They felt it was correct, they believed it was correct. They had no knowledge that it was correct..
That's not what they said.


In this discussion I am not going to question whether the plates were real or not.. I am saying that no one other than Smith translated or could translate a word of the text of the BofM..
But you're wrong. Because it was translated by the gift and power of God, it could have been translated by anyone God chose for the ***. This does not change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon.


Is any part of the Bible the work of one man? Even the Children of Israel heard God speak to them from Sinai. Seventy of the Elders of the people accompanied Moses up onto the mountain where God made it clear to them that Moses had been called as the Lord's prophet. Did God ever do such a thing for Smith? Did Jesus ever appear to any of the elders of mormonism and make it clear Smith had been called to be His prophet? Has any of the BofM's original language ever been translated by anyone but Smith? NO! It is a one man show.. A secret and Jesus told us that in secret He does nothing (John 18:20).
Is that a yes or a no?


As long as it teaches a different Gospel, A gospel of grace available to mankind only after they have done all they can do, it will never be believable.
So it's not a matter of being new after all? You just removed the barrier to believing it that you previously erected.


And why did Smith make such a proclamation?
He didn't.

neverending
01-31-2014, 06:47 PM
That's not what they said.


But you're wrong. Because it was translated by the gift and power of God, it could have been translated by anyone God chose for the ***. This does not change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon.


Is that a yes or a no?


So it's not a matter of being new after all? You just removed the barrier to believing it that you previously erected.


He didn't.

Why would God choose a dishonest man to be his spokesman? Why a man who was known for money digging, found guilty in a court of law? Is this the kind of worthy man that God would allow to bring forth His supposed church? Why a need for a restoration when God's gospel was here all along?

Your church preaches another gospel, it is a works based religion and there is no amount of good works that would EVER be acceptable to God. In fact in Isaiah it says, "All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags....." (Is. 64:6) Do you understand what filthy rags means? Not to gross everyone out but it represents the rags that women wore during that time of the month. So, now that is how God sees the foolish attempts to do righteous acts, and the LDS continue attempting to do things, throwing filthy rags at His feet.
It is only through the shed blood of Jesus that we have any righteousness. When we accept Him and allow Him into our hearts, he then wraps us in HIS righteousness so that when the day comes and we stand before God, we who have accepted Him will be found spotless.

Erundur
01-31-2014, 07:08 PM
Why would God choose a dishonest man to be his spokesman? Why a man who was known for money digging, found guilty in a court of law?
He didn't; he chose Joseph Smith.


Your church preaches another gospel
That's right; we preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.

neverending
01-31-2014, 08:45 PM
He didn't; he chose Joseph Smith.


That's right; we preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.

NO! It is up to you to prove to me that Joseph Smith was an honest man. God wouldn't choose such a man as JS. A man as I said who was arrested, brought before a judge, found guilty of money digging, cheating his neighbors, an adulterer, liar and vandal. You do know that he helped in destroying the Expositor. Was this the behavior of a prophet of God? And NO! Your gospel is NOT the one Jesus taught. Tell me where Jesus taught that man would become a god. Tell me where Jesus taught that people must be married in the temple. Tell me where Jesus taught that we must do good works. Tell me where Jesus taught that man should do temple work for the dead. Yours IS another gospel and it continues to deceive many and it leads people far from the one true God. None of these things are found within the Bible, no, these are man made ideas and made up doctrines. You want to keep your eyes closed and afraid to know the truth? There is no shame in investigating your religion for a church that has ALL the answers, doesn't allow any questions. Are you afraid that your family would find out you were investigating. Does that seem right that you would feel guilty for doing so? That is a sure sign of a cult.

Erundur
01-31-2014, 08:55 PM
NO! It is up to you to prove to me that Joseph Smith was an honest man.
I don't have to prove squat to you.


God wouldn't choose such a man as JS.
The fact that he did proves that he would.

James Banta
01-31-2014, 10:54 PM
I don't have to prove squat to you.


The fact that he did proves that he would.

Since we have shown that he is dishonest. A man that cheated his neighbors in paying him to find treasure on their land. That he was brought before a judge to answer those charges and paid fines after the judge heard him proves that he was dishonest. If you want to stick by the fairy tale that Smith was and honest man then you will have to prove that he was never charged and paid fines in a criminal trial..

God did choose Moses after he committed murder. God didn't withdraw His blessing He gave Abraham after Abraham faithlessly took Hagar for his wife to try to force God's promises to come to p***.. The difference between these men and their sin and Smith and his sin is that both Moses and Abraham repented.. Smith went on writing revelations tacking God's name on the lustful desires of his own heart.. God doesn't change what was adultery in the days of Moses was adultery in the days of Smith.. In taking another man's wife to his bed, then saying that God commanded it proves that Smith didn't change, he was always a perverse liar and cheat. Such a man is not worthy of salvation much less worthy to be God's spokesman to the people.. NE was right such a man who lived outside repentance, outside of faith in Jesus is a man God would never choose.. IHS jim

Apologette
02-01-2014, 09:41 AM
Nobody else ever even peeked at the CONTENT of that book but joe smith. smith was the only one who could 'testify' that the content of the book of mormon was anything OTHER THAN FICTION. And of course like most of his stuff, nobody could 'check' him. He and he alone made up the mormon religion.

Agree or disagree? Comments?

in the Name of Jesus Christ,
morefish
Sort of odd since the Bible indicates that two or three witnesses are needed to establish a fact! But, then, maybe there weren't enough funny stones to go around!

Apologette
02-01-2014, 09:44 AM
He didn't; he chose Joseph Smith.


That's right; we preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.

You preach the strange, bizarro gospel of Joe Smith, the Mormon deity. None of the whacky doctrines central to Mormonism are taught either in the Bible, or recorded in the tradition of the Church. There is no evidence that Christians taught polygamy as a way to godhood, or that ***hing was necessary to reach some weird Celestial Kingdom where there is eternal sex. Mormonism is a wholly new religious system coming straight from the fallen, evil mind, of Joe Smith.

Christian
02-01-2014, 10:38 AM
e posted:

Originally Posted by James BantaThey knew the translation was correct because Joseph Smith told them it was correct and if they ask God he would give them that ***urance. They felt it was correct, they believed it was correct. They had no knowledge that it was correct..

That's not what they said.

PLEASE CITE FOR US where any of them said they had CHECKED HIS TRANSLATION and it was correct. (you can't of course, because none ever did so)


In this discussion I am not going to question whether the plates were real or not.. I am saying that no one other than Smith translated or could translate a word of the text of the BofM..

But you're wrong. Because it was translated by the gift and power of God, it could have been translated by anyone God chose for the ***. This does not change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon.

NOT ONE OF WHOM ever translated one word of it. NOT ONE OF WHOM COULD HONESTLY TESTIFY that the TEXT SAID ANYTHING AT ALL.


Is any part of the Bible the work of one man? Even the Children of Israel heard God speak to them from Sinai. Seventy of the Elders of the people accompanied Moses up onto the mountain where God made it clear to them that Moses had been called as the Lord's prophet. Did God ever do such a thing for Smith? Did Jesus ever appear to any of the elders of mormonism and make it clear Smith had been called to be His prophet? Has any of the BofM's original language ever been translated by anyone but Smith? NO! It is a one man show.. A secret and Jesus told us that in secret He does nothing (John 18:20).

Is that a yes or a no?

Nope, nobody but joseph smith could testify of the CONTENT of his book.

So you are STILL STUCK with joseph smith's one-man show, NOBODY TRANSLATED THE BOOK BUT HIM. NOBODY CAN TESTIFY AS TO THE VALIDITY OF ITS CONTENTS BUT HIM.

Christian

Christian
02-01-2014, 10:42 AM
e posted:

Originally Posted by neverendingWhy would God choose a dishonest man to be his spokesman? Why a man who was known for money digging, found guilty in a court of law?


He didn't; he chose Joseph Smith.

A well-known liar, peepstone gazer, and money digger. Yep, joe smith.



Your church preaches another gospel

That's right; we preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.

a false gospel never taught in BIBLICAL times, of your false jesus christ, a demonic spirit-brother-of-satan that joe smith invented.

Yep a 'different' gospel of a 'different' jesus.

Christian

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 11:17 AM
[COLOR=#008000]A well-known liar, peepstone gazer,
I have always wondered what actually is "peepstone"?

Is it a type of quartz ?

James Banta
02-01-2014, 11:55 AM
[Erundur;152290]That's not what they said.

If you have proof that Joseph Smith was wrong about these men and they were the liars he called them them show us where they said they saw Jesus and heard His voice testifying to the truth of the BofM. Surely such an event would have been recorded by them and not just by Smith..


But you're wrong. Because it was translated by the gift and power of God, it could have been translated by anyone God chose for the ***. This does not change the fact that there are at least three other witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon.

This then should be hard.. If they KNEW that the text was correctly translated then they read the untranslated text as it appeared on the plates. Just show me where that was done.. Do you need to see the text of the different translators of the Bible? There have been many. Each translation had more than one man doing the work but instead a whole team.. What parts did any of the witnesses translate as a teammate of Smith in the translation work? A couple of them worked as a scribe but did any of the share in the translation? No?


Is that a yes or a no?

To what question?


So it's not a matter of being new after all? You just removed the barrier to believing it that you previously erected.

There is a new doctrine taught in the BofM.. It says we are saved by grace AFTER ALL WE CAN DO (2 Nephi 25:23). The Holy Spirit through Paul said that if salvation were by works then it is not of grace and if it is by grace it is not of works (Romans 11:6). The BofM then teaches that salvation is by grace but only the works gained through works. That is a new doctrine because the older revelation, the Bible, teaches that works and grace are diametrically opposed.


He didn't.

If the BofM is the fraud that Science and the Bible show it to be Then the BofM are Smiths words and not those of God.. That would make that the BofM being the word of God Smith's own personal statement and not God's word through Holy Prophets.. Smith alone made all the proclamations stated in the BofM.. IHS jim

neverending
02-01-2014, 12:00 PM
I don't have to prove squat to you.


The fact that he did proves that he would.

Still waiting for your answer as to when did Jesus ever teach about temple marriage, or that we must do good works, or do work for the dead. No answers? Then yes, your religion teaches another gospel!

Erundur
02-01-2014, 01:29 PM
Since we have shown that he is dishonest. A man that cheated his neighbors in paying him to find treasure on their land. That he was brought before a judge to answer those charges and paid fines after the judge heard him proves that he was dishonest. If you want to stick by the fairy tale that Smith was and honest man then you will have to prove that he was never charged and paid fines in a criminal trial..
Nope, you have to prove your own claim. But either way, it wouldn't change the fact that there were three other witnesses for the text of the Book of Mormon.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 01:30 PM
You preach the strange, bizarro gospel of Joe Smith, the Mormon deity.
So you lie.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 01:37 PM
PLEASE CITE FOR US where any of them said they had CHECKED HIS TRANSLATION and it was correct.
Why?

Here's what they said: "And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."


NOT ONE OF WHOM ever translated one word of it. NOT ONE OF WHOM COULD HONESTLY TESTIFY that the TEXT SAID ANYTHING AT ALL.

See above.


Nope, nobody but joseph smith could testify of the CONTENT of his book.

So you are STILL STUCK with joseph smith's one-man show, NOBODY TRANSLATED THE BOOK BUT HIM. NOBODY CAN TESTIFY AS TO THE VALIDITY OF ITS CONTENTS BUT HIM.
See above.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 01:40 PM
A well-known liar, peepstone gazer, and money digger. Yep, joe smith.
Nope, Joseph Smith. The real one, not the anti-Mormon joe smith.


a false gospel never taught in BIBLICAL times, of your false jesus christ, a demonic spirit-brother-of-satan that joe smith invented.
As a Christian, I disagree with you that the gospel of Jesus Christ is false.


Yep a 'different' gospel of a 'different' jesus.
Yep, the real gospel of the Biblical Jesus Christ.

neverending
02-01-2014, 03:19 PM
So you lie.

NO! The ONLY one here that continues to lie is YOU!! I am still waiting for you to answer my questions. Where did Jesus teach we were to be married in the temple? Where did Jesus teach that we must do work for the dead? Where did Jesus teach that we must do good works? So, since you have failed to show me where I am wrong, again it is Mormonism, your religion that is teaching ANOTHER Gospel, far from the teachings of Christianity and the church Jesus began.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 03:37 PM
This then should be hard.. If they KNEW that the text was correctly translated then they read the untranslated text as it appeared on the plates.
That's one way they could know, but hardly the only way. They KNEW it was translated correctly because God told them it was, and they fully trusted God.


To what question?
"Is that what you would have told the first century saints regarding the books of the New Testament?"


There is a new doctrine taught in the BofM..
So would you have advised the first century saints to disbelieve the new doctrines taught by Jesus and the books of the New Testament?


If the BofM is the fraud that Science and the Bible show it to be Then the BofM are Smiths words and not those of God..
Not necessarily, but since the Book of Mormon isn't a fraud, it doesn't matter.

neverending
02-01-2014, 03:39 PM
Nope, Joseph Smith. The real one, not the anti-Mormon joe smith.


As a Christian, I disagree with you that the gospel of Jesus Christ is false.


Yep, the real gospel of the Biblical Jesus Christ.

YOU are NOT a Christian! Your church wants so desperately to look Christian but we know different. Stop the pretense, stop the lies and admit that Mormonism is another gospel that Paul warned the Church about. Gal. 1:8, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." How interesting that the scribes who wrote the NT would use such words as, "an angel from heaven." Yes, an angel who was one of Satan's minions or Satan himself. "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds."
If you must work out your salvation and obey ALL your churches laws and ordinances, have you succeeded? Are you to tell us that you are so righteous and have NEVER broken any laws of God? Would telling a white lie be breaking God's law? For even a white lie is still a lie and so that makes one a liar does it not? God knew we could never obey his laws, that is why we needed a Savior. Now as a Mormon, you want to do the *** yourself instead of accepting God's free gift of salvation. Course Mormons have a whole different definition of salvation then Christians, don't you? Mormons have several definitions that are not the same as what I believe nor the other Christians here. Salvation for me was given freely the moment I accepted Jesus into my heart and life. He changed me and made me a new person. Believing in him makes me WANT to do good, not be forced to as it is in your religion. My salvation has given me eternal life, a life I will live someday in God's presence and standing at His right hand; can you say the same? 11 John 5:13

James Banta
02-01-2014, 06:42 PM
[Erundur;152331]That's one way they could know, but hardly the only way. They KNEW it was translated correctly because God told them it was, and they fully trusted God.

There is no place in the records of mormonism that tell us that any of the witnesses ever heard the voice of God as Joseph Smith said he heard and saw him.. They could say that they heard him testify of the translation and they therefore know it was true.. I can say the same thing.. I have had God tell me that the BofM is a scam set in place by a man who improperly used God's name and called himself a prophet in so doing.. Therefore like these men have said that they know the translation is correct, I by the authority of the Holy Spirit say that I know it is a fraud, a lie congered up from the legends of the mound builders and the fertile imagination of Joseph Smith to lead some weak minded men of his era to make false statements.. And I say that through the authority of Jesus because the Holy Spirit has told me these things.. Can't you see that my spiritual experiences are just as authoritative as theirs? They have no right to expect me or anyone else to believe them anymore than I have for you to believe me.. I say with authority that no one of these people including Smith ever saw or heard God, or an angel. All they have to confirm that anything they say is true is a personal emotional experience.. I can respect it as that until it is held up as absolute and mine diminished into worthlessness.. They are equal and therefore not to be used as proof of anything.. All you can use to prove anything here is the Bible.. That and that alone is accepted as God's authoritative word..


"Is that what you would have told the first century saints regarding the books of the New Testament?"

If the NT was filled with doctrines that dismissed the law and the prophets I would say that yes.. That is what LDS prophets do they dismiss the Bible and rebuild themselves as the only real rule of law of the Church. Even the LDS scripture is changeable that their whim and will. Remember the words of President Benson on that matter; that the prophet is more important to the LDS than the Standard works? The whole doctrine of mormonism is shifting sand. Is Adam God? Is there many High priest or one? Is there more than one God, even for this world? All that would be the doctrines of mormonism if it's doctrines didn't change..



So would you have advised the first century saints to disbelieve the new doctrines taught by Jesus and the books of the New Testament?

Jesus taught no new doctrines.. He only intensified all that was commanded.. Look at the Sermon on the Mount for the text..



Not necessarily, but since the Book of Mormon isn't a fraud, it doesn't matter.

Since ALL the physical evidence points to it being a fraud I have to believe that you just don't know what you are talking about.. IHS jim

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 06:57 PM
There is no place in the records of mormonism that tell us that any of the witnesses ever heard the voice of God as Joseph Smith said he heard and saw him..

Jim shoots......and Jim SCORES!

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 07:00 PM
Jim I gots to tell you,,,you hit the nail on the head there......

You do carry all the water for us around here and do all of the real heavy lifting...
And it has made you ever the more better at precisely pointing out the flaws in Mormonism.


keep up the good work!

Erundur
02-01-2014, 07:03 PM
NO! The ONLY one here that continues to lie is YOU!!
So you lie.

neverending
02-01-2014, 07:05 PM
So you lie.

You are childish! And I am still waiting for your answers to my questions. Since you've FAILED to answer, then not answering tells me everything, you can't! You have no answers so there for, it is you that is living a lie, believing in lies and trying to spread your lies. God help you.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 07:06 PM
YOU are NOT a Christian!
Of course I am. You're not a Christian. So there.

neverending
02-01-2014, 07:07 PM
Of course I am. You're not a Christian. So there.

More childish replies. "I am, no you are!" Give it a rest and go back to your mommy.

Erundur
02-01-2014, 07:12 PM
There is no place in the records of mormonism that tell us that any of the witnesses ever heard the voice of God as Joseph Smith said he heard and saw him..
From the Testimony of Three Witnesses:

"And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harris

Erundur
02-01-2014, 07:23 PM
You are childish!
You are arrogant.

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 07:31 PM
You are arrogant.
I am Norwegian.....

neverending
02-01-2014, 08:19 PM
I am Norwegian.....

I'm Scotch-Irish. Ask James, I even have the reddish hair to go along with my heritage :)

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 08:23 PM
I'm Scotch-Irish. Ask James, I even have the reddish hair to go along with my heritage :)
I love Irish girls!
I almost married one...

Big bosoms and a quick tongue if I remember right.... :)

James Banta
02-01-2014, 09:00 PM
From the Testimony of Three Witnesses:

"And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

- Oliver Cowdery
- David Whitmer
- Martin Harris

History tells us tat Smith wrote this history and convinced these men that these things had happened.. Later the LDS taught that Cowdery denied that testimony and kept him as an enemy of the LDS church until he crawled back then poof he was a witness again.. Martin Harris told the press that he NEVER saw the plates with his natural eyes but only with spiritual eyes.. So much for the witness statement that Smith wrote it is completely unreliable.. IHS jim

Erundur
02-01-2014, 09:23 PM
History tells us tat Smith wrote this history and convinced these men that these things had happened..
No it doesn't. You just made that up.

The Testimony of Three Witnesses (which is part of the records of Mormonism) proves that your statement is false: "There is no place in the records of mormonism (sic) that tell us that any of the witnesses ever heard the voice of God as Joseph Smith said he heard and saw him.."


Martin Harris told the press that he NEVER saw the plates with his natural eyes but only with spiritual eyes..
"Gentlemen...do you see that hand? Are you sure you see it? Or are your eyes playing you a trick or something? No. Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the Angel and the plates. Brethren, I know I saw and heard these things, and the Lord knows I know these things of which I was spoken are true." - Martin Harris

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 09:32 PM
History tells us tat Smith wrote this history and convinced these men that these things had happened.. Later the LDS taught that Cowdery denied that testimony and kept him as an enemy of the LDS church until he crawled back then poof he was a witness again.. Martin Harris told the press that he NEVER saw the plates with his natural eyes but only with spiritual eyes.. So much for the witness statement that Smith wrote it is completely unreliable.. IHS jim


Good post Jim...

The Mormon's Smith seems to me sorta like an religious Elmer Gantry.....

alanmolstad
02-01-2014, 09:34 PM
The Testimony of Three Witnesses ......

Just to make sure I understand, these are the same 3 witnesses we talked about before?

James Banta
02-01-2014, 10:05 PM
[Erundur;152195]And then you said, "Smith then is the only witness to the BofM.." which is a false statement.

Here we go with the most useless of all arguments.. You say "Is not" I respond with "Is to".. I have explained why Smith is the only witness all you have done it gone back to statements Smith penned and convinced weak minded men to sign.. If the Angel would have appeared to the witnesses with the plates why does the History of the Church tell us that Martin Harris couldn't see the Angel nor the plates as Cowdery and Whitmer confessed seeing the angel with the plates (History of the Church, vol. 1, pp. 54-55)? If he was there in full view of physical vision then why didn't Harris see the angel as Cowdery and Whitmer did? One reason.. They, NONE OF THEM, saw anything with their natural eyes.. Read the account for yourself.. It's not in anti mormon literature.. But it sure casts a light of fraud on Smith and truth on Harris as he confessed never seeing the angel or the plated with his natural eyes (Early Mormon Documents, vol. 2, pp. 291-292)..


Who told you I don't believe those witnesses? (What did they actually say?)

So you believe the strangite witnesses? Why are you Strangite then? You can find their witness statement in http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Witnesses/Strangite_parallels.. Just like we say about the BofM witness FAIR tells us that some of their witness denied their witness and even helped in the deception.. But other stayed true to their testimony.. I still believe you doubt them..


Which you interpret to mean he didn't really see them, but your interpretation is doubtful because Whitmer stated very clearly that he literally saw them with his eyes.

Seems like the only logical explanation.. He couldn't make up he mind could he.. And you call such a man as he a good witness? Between His vasilating‎ of what He saw and didn't see and Harris not being able to see the angel as the other two did it does make a person doubt..


Wrong again. The three witnesses said, "And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."

No they didn't say that they signed such a document but Smith is the one that wrote that statement.. Look back again at David Whitmer saying that it was with spiritual eyes, no it was with natural eyes, no it was with spiritual eyes, and tell me that He wasn't a man of weak character.. He was easily lead one way or the other.. He was one terrible witness.. As I said before is two of them saw the Angel and the plates with their natural eyes then any man should have been able to see the Angel but Harris couldn't.. At best it had to be spiritual experience, I believe it was a fraud from the very beginning..



<facepalm> I've been answering that for three days.

Immaturity!!! If you don't want to see anything more about this just don't answer.. You don't have to prove a lack of maturity.. IHS jim

Erundur
02-01-2014, 11:10 PM
Here we go with the most useless of all arguments.. You say "Is not" I respond with "Is to"..
Wrong. I produce the additional witnesses to the text; you deny reality, hoping it will go away.


If the Angel would have appeared to the witnesses with the plates why does the History of the Church tell us that Martin Harris couldn't see the Angel nor the plates as Cowdery and Whitmer confessed seeing the angel with the plates (History of the Church, vol. 1, pp. 54-55)?
It doesn't.


If he was there in full view of physical vision then why didn't Harris see the angel as Cowdery and Whitmer did? One reason.. They, NONE OF THEM, saw anything with their natural eyes.. Read the account for yourself..
Okay:


Seeking the Fulfilment of the Promise.
Not many days after the above commandment was given, we four, viz., Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and myself, agreed to retire into the woods, and try to obtain, by fervent and humble prayer, the fulfilment of the promises given in the above revelation [D&C 17]—that they should have a view of the plates. We accordingly made choice of a piece of woods convenient to Mr. Whitmer's house, to which we retired, and having knelt down, we began to pray in much faith to Almighty God to bestow upon us a realization of these promises.

The Order of Prayer.
According to previous arrangement, I commenced prayer to our Heavenly Father, and was followed by each of the others in succession. We did not at the first trial, however, obtain any answer or manifestation of divine favor in our behalf. We again observed the same order of prayer, each calling on and praying fervently to God in rotation, but with the same result as before.

The Visitation of the Angel—Viewing the Plates.
Upon this, our second failure, Martin Harris proposed that he should withdraw himself from us, believing, as he expressed himself, that his presence was the cause of our not obtaining what we wished for. He accordingly with drew from us, and we knelt down again, and had not been many minutes engaged in prayer, when presently we beheld a light above us in the air, of exceeding brightness; and behold, an angel stood before us. In his hands he held the plates which we had been praying for these to have a view of. He turned over the leaves one by one, so that we could see them, and discern the engravings theron distinctly. He then addressed himself to David Whitmer, and said, "David, blessed is the Lord, and he that keeps His commandments;" when, immediately afterwards, we heard a voice from out of the bright light above us, saying, "These plates have been revealed by the power of God, and they have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct, and I command you to bear record of what you now see and hear."

Martin Harris also Views the Plates.
I now left David and Oliver, and went in pursuit of Martin Harris, whom I found at a considerable distance, fervently engaged in prayer. He soon told me, however, that he had not yet prevailed with the Lord, and earnestly requested me to join him in prayer, that he also might realize the same blessings which we had just received. We accordingly joined in prayer, and ultimately obtained our desires, for before we had yet finished, the same vision was opened to our view, at least it was again opened to me, and I once more beheld and heard the same things; whilst at the same moment, Martin Harris cried out, apparently in an ecstasy of joy, " 'Tis enough; 'tis enough; mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld;" and jumping up, he shouted, "Hosanna," blessing God, and otherwise rejoiced exceedingly.

Statement of the Witnesses.
Having thus, through the mercy of God, obtained these glorious manifestations, it now remained for these three individuals to fulfil the commandment which they had received, viz., to bear record of these things; in order to accomplish which, they drew up and subscribed the following document:

The Testimony of Three Witnesses.
Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come; That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Oliver Cowdery
David Whitmer
Martin Harris

So where's the part about them not seeing anything with their natural eyes?

"we could see them, and discern the engravings theron distinctly"
"mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld"
"we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates"
"an angel of God...laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates"


So you believe the strangite witnesses?
I suppose their statement could be true.


Look back again at David Whitmer saying that it was with spiritual eyes, no it was with natural eyes, no it was with spiritual eyes,
You're ***uming the two are mutually exclusive, but what if they aren't?

"In regards to my testimony to the visitation of the angel, who declared to us three witnesses that the Book of Mormon is true, I have this to say: Of course we were in the spirit when we had the view, for no man can behold the face of an angel, except in a spiritual view, but we were in the body also, and everything was as natural to us, as it is at any time. Martin Harris, you say, called it 'being in vision.' We read in the Scriptures, Cornelius saw, in a vision, an angel of God. Daniel saw an angel in a vision; also in other places it states they saw an angel in the spirit. A bright light enveloped us where we were, that filled at noon day, and there in a vision, or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony in the Book of Mormon." - David Whitmer

Apologette
02-02-2014, 10:02 AM
So you lie.
I get really sick of Mormons, like yourself, accusing everybody of lying. Mormons would throw their own mothers under the bus if their words contradicted their god's words, that "god" being Joseph Smith. Why would God change his qualification for truth: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses would a matter be established? There was no witness to Smith's supposed communications with the spirit, Moroni (obviously a demon, if it ever happened). There were no witnesses to the First Vision, where God supposedly told the occultist, Smith, that Christians are an abomination; there were no witnesses to the finding of the "plates," because Emma was told to remain by the wagon and pray; there were no witnesses to the actual plates and their translation, since Smitty put up a blanket to avoid intrusive eyes as he was supposedly translating with the magic gl***es! And as far as the supposed 11 "witnesses," most were family members, and Harris pointed out they only saw the evidence with their "spiritual eyes." Mormonism is a lie.

James Banta
02-02-2014, 10:19 AM
[Erundur;152362]Wrong. I produce the additional witnesses to the text; you deny reality, hoping it will go away.

You have added nothing.. You keep coming back with same ole arguments backed only by documents written by Smith for Smith.. Those being the witness statements.. the same type of social engineering that Smith used to get the witnesses to sign those document was shown by the late Show in a Jay-Walking segment. People picked at random were asked what their impressions were of the Grammy awards show.. All of them had wonderful positive things to say. everyone of them said the loved music and agreed with the Grammy committee's choices for the awards. The problem was that the awards show wasn't held until that next evening.. Smith socially engineered all the witnesses to believe him no matter what was really happening..


It doesn't.

Here we go.. I show the exact reference where the data can be found that supports my position and you deny it with out showing proof that I am wrong.. I can do that too.. I Say No you are wrong.. Another "Is so, Is not" argument.. the difference being my argument was backed up by a reference, something you didn't bother with..


Okay:

I am a Christian a believer in the Bible. I don't deny visions from God.. Such have happened again and again in the scripture.. Such has happened to me.. But when it does it is a personal message from our Lord. It was in times before the Cross that God spoke to the people by the prophets. In these last days he has spoken to us through Jesus (Heb 1:1-2). If God in the person of the Son speaks directly to us why is a prophet needed? Our minds are all weak and susceptible to outside manipulation. Tat is what happened to the witnesses.. Smith was able to bend their impression to reach the conclusions he wanted then to reach.. He was a master at this. He did it even to Ema who never wanted to share him with other women but did finally allow his other marriages..


So where's the part about them not seeing anything with their natural eyes?

"we could see them, and discern the engravings theron distinctly"
"mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld"
"we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates"
"an angel of God...laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates"


I suppose their statement could be true.


You're ***uming the two are mutually exclusive, but what if they aren't?

"In regards to my testimony to the visitation of the angel, who declared to us three witnesses that the Book of Mormon is true, I have this to say: Of course we were in the spirit when we had the view, for no man can behold the face of an angel, except in a spiritual view, but we were in the body also, and everything was as natural to us, as it is at any time. Martin Harris, you say, called it 'being in vision.' We read in the Scriptures, Cornelius saw, in a vision, an angel of God. Daniel saw an angel in a vision; also in other places it states they saw an angel in the spirit. A bright light enveloped us where we were, that filled at noon day, and there in a vision, or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony in the Book of Mormon." - David Whitmer

By your own admission in your quote of David Whitmer.. He said that they were in a spiritual state and even though they were physically present VISION is the word that could only be used for their experience..As it was for Daniel, and Cornelius.. Not as it was for Peter and then for the other 10 Apostles when Thomas thrust His hand into the wounds of Jesus.. David Whitmer said clearly that a "Light enveloped us where we were, that filled at noon day, and there in a vision, or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony in the Book of Mormon".. He never did again claimed that he saw the angel with natural eyes.. It was a VISION.. IHS jim

Apologette
02-02-2014, 11:04 AM
I am Norwegian.....

I'm Danish!

Erundur
02-02-2014, 11:54 AM
I get really sick of Mormons, like yourself, accusing everybody of lying.
I get really sick of anti-Mormons, like yourself, lying.


Mormons would throw their own mothers under the bus if their words contradicted their god's words, that "god" being Joseph Smith.
So you lie.

Erundur
02-02-2014, 12:11 PM
You have added nothing..
I have added three witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon, proving the anti-Mormon position in this thread false.


Here we go.. I show the exact reference where the data can be found that supports my position
Wrong! The reference you cited states that Harris DID see the angel and the plates. (Mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld!) You should really read your sources before you cite them.


and you deny it with out showing proof that I am wrong..
What are you talking about??? I quoted the source you cited which proves that you're wrong!!!



Our minds are all weak and susceptible to outside manipulation. Tat is what happened to the witnesses.. Smith was able to bend their impression to reach the conclusions he wanted then to reach.. He was a master at this.
Prove it.


By your own admission in your quote of David Whitmer.. He said that they were in a spiritual state and even though they were physically present
Right; they plates were physically present and they saw them while in the spirit. "Spiritual" or "visionary" does not equal "imaginary"!


He never did again claimed that he saw the angel with natural eyes..
"No, sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!" - David Whitmer

Apologette
02-02-2014, 01:41 PM
I get really sick of anti-Mormons, like yourself, lying.


So you lie.

Gee, you remind me of somebody over on CARM that just got booted for declaring Christians liars. Don't you understand, Richard, that what you say here is meaningless? David Whitmer, by the way, denied that there ever was any "priesthood" imparted to Mormons. So, when was he telling the truth Richard?

Christian
02-02-2014, 05:32 PM
[quote]Originally Posted by Christianhttp://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=152309#post152309)PLEASE CITE FOR US where any of them said they had CHECKED HIS TRANSLATION and it was correct.


Why?

To demonstrate that EVEN ONE PERSON ANYWHERE could vouch for the supposed accuracy of smith's translation. BTW, WHY (if it was accurately translated) were over 4,000 CHANGES required to get from the first version to the version you have now???!!!


Here's what they said: "And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true."


Nope, nobody but joseph smith could testify of the CONTENT of his book.

So you are STILL STUCK with joseph smith's one-man show, NOBODY TRANSLATED THE BOOK BUT HIM. NOBODY CAN TESTIFY AS TO THE VALIDITY OF ITS CONTENTS BUT HIM.
See above.


As I said, you have NOBODY but joe smith to vouch for ANY of the story he made up in his book but JOE SMITH HIMSELF.

He was STILL a one-man show.

He TRIED to get some kind of 'other witness' in Professor Anton, but Anton wouldn't do it. There is no way Anton could have said (as harris claimed) that it was a 'perfect translation' of the childing attempts smith sent being "Reformed Egyptian" since Anton would have no way of translating a language he didn't know.

Anton called harris (and by extension, smith) a liar.

Sorry, but you end up with . . .nothing but the word of your conman, money digger, peepstone gazer who talked through his hat.

in the Name of Jesus Christ,
morefish

Christian
02-02-2014, 05:40 PM
e posted:

[/quote]Nope, nobody but joseph smith could testify of the CONTENT of his book.

So you are STILL STUCK with joseph smith's one-man show, NOBODY TRANSLATED THE BOOK BUT HIM. NOBODY CAN TESTIFY AS TO THE VALIDITY OF ITS CONTENTS BUT HIM.[/quote]

Nope, Joseph Smith. The real one, not the anti-Mormon joe smith.

Yes, that is the joseph smith I described.



a false gospel never taught in BIBLICAL times, of your false jesus christ, a demonic spirit-brother-of-satan that joe smith invented.

As a Christian, I disagree with you that the gospel of Jesus Christ is false.

But as the heathen you are (if you are a true-blue mormon), you would have to admit that joe smith's 'jesus' is according to HIM a spirit brother of satan.

The REAL Jesus Christ (Whom you would have to follow to be a REAL Christian) CREATED THE ANGELS, including the fallen angel, satan. THE REAL JESUS CHRIST is NOT satan's 'brother' but is his CREATOR instead.

Joe smith didn't realize the difference.

In the Name of the REAL Jesus Christ,
morefish

Phoenix
02-02-2014, 07:22 PM
I get really sick of Mormons, like yourself, accusing everybody of lying.
I don't think you can find even one Mormon (singular) who accuses everybody of lying.


Why would God change his qualification for truth: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses would a matter be established?
Who are the 2 or 3 witnesses to Moses' claim regarding what he saw and heard on a mountain?


There was no witness to Smith's supposed communications with the spirit, Moroni (obviously a demon, if it ever happened).
I think if you check the account, it is learned that Moroni wasn't just a spirit. The claim is that he was a resurrected person, if my recollection is correct.


There were no witnesses to the First Vision, where God supposedly told the occultist, Smith, that Christians are an abomination;
Are you saying that God will only answer a person's prayer if there happen to be other witnesses present to verify that the miraculous answer really occurred? Doesn't that theory present some problems?

Erundur
02-02-2014, 09:07 PM
Gee, you remind me of somebody over on CARM that just got booted for declaring Christians liars.
Did your discernment powers tell you that, Beatrice?

My posting privileges on CARM are fullly intact. :)

Erundur
02-02-2014, 09:18 PM
To demonstrate that EVEN ONE PERSON ANYWHERE could vouch for the supposed accuracy of smith's translation.
And I've produced three people who vouched for the accuracy of the translation, just not in the way that you demand (moving the goalposts).


BTW, WHY (if it was accurately translated) were over 4,000 CHANGES required to get from the first version to the version you have now???!!!
Mostly to standardize the grammar and punctuation and correct m****cript and typesetting errors, and some clarifications.


As I said, you have NOBODY but joe smith to vouch for ANY of the story he made up in his book but JOE SMITH HIMSELF.
Yes you said that, but you're wrong. I've produced three additional witnesses, so your claim is proven false.

Erundur
02-02-2014, 09:26 PM
But as the heathen you are (if you are a true-blue mormon)
Let's examine your ***ertion. What is a heathen?


heathen noun

1: an unconverted member of a people or nation that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible
2: an uncivilized or irreligious person

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heathen

By virtue of being a so-called "true-blue Mormon," I acknowledge the God of the Bible. I am also both civilized and religious, therefore I can't be a heathen, and your entire rant is based on a falsehood.

neverending
02-02-2014, 09:53 PM
And I've produced three people who vouched for the accuracy of the translation, just not in the way that you demand (moving the goalposts).


Mostly to standardize the grammar and punctuation and correct m****cript and typesetting errors, and some clarifications.


Yes you said that, but you're wrong. I've produced three additional witnesses, so your claim is proven false.

Your answer here makes no sense. Now, if God was there helping JS with translating these gold plates, HOW would there ever be any grammatical errors or punctuation errors? My God doesn't make mistakes, HE knows ALL things!! And what would these clarifications that needed changing? erundur, you are grabbing at straws trying hard to explain things that logical people, who haven't been blinded by false teachings can see plainly. JS said, "the BoM was translated by the gift and power of God." His words, but seems that the God you worship doesn't know all things does he, else why the errors?

Erundur
02-03-2014, 12:13 AM
Now, if God was there helping JS with translating these gold plates,
The claim is that they were translated by the gift and power of God, not that God was physically there in the room with him, helping him translate.

James Banta
02-03-2014, 10:30 AM
The claim is that they were translated by the gift and power of God, not that God was physically there in the room with him, helping him translate.

Since Smith couldn't even read or write English to any educated degree the BofM translation had to be given to him.. According to the BofM witnesses that you have been putting so much importance on Smith got every word of the BofM directly translated for Him by God:

I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. (An Address to All Believers in Christ, by David Whitmer, 1887, page 12)

That would make be help the whole of the translation would be words used by God.. It should have been perfect requiring no changes at all. When the printer offered his services to make changes to the book to correct the grammar he was answered "When the printer was ready to commence work, Harris was notified, and Hyrum Smith brought the first installment of m****cript ... On the second day — Harris and Smith being in the office — I called their attention to a grammatical error, and asked whether I should correct it? Harris consulted with Smith a short time, and turned to me and said: 'The Old Testament is ungrammatical, set it as it is written.' " (Memorandum, made by John H. Gilbert, Esq., September 8, 1892, Palmyra, N.Y., printed in Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 1, Introduction).

Looks like either the witnesses were liars or the errors in the BofM were given to Smith by the flawed mormon God and later almost 4,000 of them were corrected.. IHS jim

James Banta
02-03-2014, 03:36 PM
[Erundur;152376]I have added three witnesses to the text of the Book of Mormon, proving the anti-Mormon position in this thread false.

You have shown a statement written by Smith saying what he wanted it to say.. The witnesses said that it was a spiritual statement again and again.. the Gold plates never left the Smith home during the time the witnesses say that they say the Angel and the plates.. The translation process continued after that moment in LDS history. This event was said to have occurred in June of 1829.. The History say it happened while the translation was in process (HISTORY of the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST of LATTER-DAY SAINTS Vol 1:Chapter 6).. If you insist that they saw the angel with their natural eyes the plates had to be there in vision only..


Wrong! The reference you cited states that Harris DID see the angel and the plates. (Mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld!) You should really read your sources before you cite them.

Sorry Whitmer said "in a vision, or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony" Look it up is is from "Marvin S. Hill, "Brodie Revisited: A Reappraisal," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, (Winter, 1972): pp. 83-84."..


What are you talking about??? I quoted the source you cited which proves that you're wrong!!!

But the source said he saw the plates with spiritual eyes.. On another occasion Martin Harris was being interviewed by one John Clark a minister from New York. The questions and answers went this way:

"Did you see those plates?" Harris replied, he did. "Did you see the plates, and the engraving on them with your bodily eyes?" Harris replied, "Yes, I saw them with my eyes,—they were shown unto me by the power of God and not of man." "But did you see them with your natural,—your bodily eyes, just as you see this pencil-case in my hand? Now say no or yes to this." Harris replied,—"Why I did not see them as I do that pencil-case, yet I saw them with the eye of faith" (Ed. Dan Vogel, Signature Books, Early Mormon Documents Vol. 2 p 270).

That was the common theme of who the witnesses saw the plates and when it is clear from LDS history that only Cowdrey and Whitmer saw the plated and the Angel at first.

Joseph had the three witnesses pray continually in an effort to obtain a view of the plates, but to no avail. Finally: Upon this, our second failure, Martin Harris proposed that he should withdraw himself from us, believing, as he expressed himself, that his presence was the cause of our not obtaining what we wished for. He accordingly withdrew from us, and we knelt down again, . . . presently we beheld a light above us in the air, of exceeding brightness; and behold, an angel stood before us. In his hands he held the plates. . . . Smith then left David and Oliver, and went in pursuit of Martin Harris. . . . We accordingly joined in prayer, and ultimately obtained our desires, for before we had yet finished, the same vision was opened to our view, at least it was again opened to me, whilst at the same moment, Martin Harris cried out, apparently in an ecstasy of joy, " 'Tis enough; 'tis enough; mine eyes have beheld; mine eyes have beheld" (History of the Church, vol. 1, pp. 54-55.)

The question is now, does anyone see visions with their natural eyes, or with spiritual eyes?


Prove it.

I can show you how eager Smith's early fiends were to rush off to Toronto to sell the copywrite of the BofM because Smith convinced them they would be successful. I could show you how Smith talked Ema to accept his marriage to other women. I could show you how his story of seeing God and Jesus though it has changed over the years still makes people believe that he was a prophet.. What do you need to see to believe that his fairy tales are just a con *** to give himself power over other and power over their purses..



Right; they plates were physically present and they saw them while in the spirit. "Spiritual" or "visionary" does not equal "imaginary"!

I agree bit it also doesn't mean physical.. To know if their vision was the truth of God or just a strong desire of their own deceitful heart is another matter.. As Martin Harris cried out, apparently in an ecstasy of joy, " 'Tis enough; 'tis enough; mine eyes have beheld.. He wanted that VISION so bad that His mind could have conjured up the entire event.. It's it easier to just hold faith in Jesus as we are directed in the Bible instead of trying to make a lie into truth? Hebrews tells us that the prophets were of the Old Testament and instead of them we now have Jesus. But that is too simple for the LDS. They have to invent a new gospel that really is a different gospel, A gospel Paul warned us about in Galatians 1:8-9..


"No, sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!" - David Whitmer

But differently than he would see something tangible.. Spiritual eyes are real and I don't doubt that a man can have a vision. But the most these three had was a spiritual experience and what is more likely was a m*** hallucination..

All three of the witness wavered in their witness all those were reported to the church as I have pointed out. Yes they all said they saw the angel and the plates (the plates that were back in the house hidden away). And still all three said that they saw the plates with spiritual eyes and not with natural eyes.. Even to that God has told us is a problem:

James 1:6-8
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

It is clear from the yes and no answer they gave to the questions of how their witness was given that they did waver. Because they did waver they receives nothing from the Lord and that they were double minded men and unstable in all their ways. That is the truth and you must agree or deny that James 1:6-8 is God's word.. IHS jim

RealFakeHair
02-03-2014, 04:05 PM
The con-operator will always be in control of his eviroment and the tool inwhich he use to complete the confidence trick. Every LDSinc. TBM is Joseph Smith jr. (Mark). Nothing more, and nothing less.

Phoenix
02-03-2014, 09:12 PM
The con-operator will always be in control of his eviroment and the tool inwhich he use to complete the confidence trick.

That is what the atheists could say as an accusation against Jesus.

John T
02-03-2014, 09:33 PM
That is what the atheists could say as an accusation against Jesus.

Please clarify. Are you perhaps saying that you believe Jesus, the Son of God is a con artist?

RealFakeHair
02-04-2014, 09:30 AM
That is what the atheists could say as an accusation against Jesus.

There is no difference between an atheist and a TBM, except one believes in no god and the other believes in unlimited gods.

James Banta
02-04-2014, 10:00 AM
There is no difference between an atheist and a TBM, except one believes in no god and the other believes in unlimited gods.

That is profound!.. There is no difference at all.. Both are in serious error.. To the Atheist God says "I AM" (Exodus 3:14) to the LDS He says "I AM ONE" (Deut 6:4).. IHS jim

Christian
02-04-2014, 10:55 AM
Confused e posted:

Let's examine your ***ertion. What is a heathen?




heathen noun

1: an unconverted member of a people or nation that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible
2: an uncivilized or irreligious person

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heathen

By virtue of being a so-called "true-blue Mormon," I acknowledge the God of the Bible. I am also both civilized and religious, therefore I can't be a heathen, and your entire rant is based on a falsehood.

Let's see now. The God of the BIBLE is the ONLY REAL God existing anywhere ever (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8, etc etc etc)

The god of joseph smith is one of MANY so-called gods supposedly existing everywhere (pgp abraham 3 & 4 etc etc)

Nope, the god of mormonism is NOT the God of the Bible. Yes, you ARE a heathen, apparently. That is likely why you don't understand the Bible.

1 Cor 2:14-15
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
NKJV

This seems to describe you clearly.

in the BIBLICAL Jesus, (not the mormon demonic 'jesus' joe smith invented),
morefish

Erundur
02-04-2014, 11:34 AM
Bigoted m posted:

Let's see now. The God of the BIBLE is the ONLY REAL God existing anywhere ever (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8, etc etc etc)

The god of joseph smith is one of MANY so-called gods supposedly existing everywhere (pgp abraham 3 & 4 etc etc)

Nope, the god of mormonism is NOT the God of the Bible. Yes, you ARE a heathen, apparently. That is likely why you don't understand the Bible.
Let's try this again.

heathen noun

1: an unconverted member of a people or nation that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible
2: an uncivilized or irreligious person

A heathen is someone who doesn't acknowledge the God of the Bible. I acknowledge the God of the Bible. Therefore, I am not a heathen. (second explanation)


1 Cor 2:14-15
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
NKJV

This seems to describe you clearly.
That's because you're looking at the situation through anti-Mormon blinders.

alanmolstad
02-04-2014, 03:23 PM
The Mormon god is not the God of the bible, not the God of the old testament, not the God of the law and the prophets, nor the God that Jesus prayed to and taught us about....(and that's why the Mormons need to have their own bible, and their own prophets :))

see this video to answer any questions about who the God of the Bible is... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4AN2hHk7ws

or better yet, you can learn the biggest difference between the god of the christian Bible, and the god of the Mormons, here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plX5SEHUNSM

RealFakeHair
02-04-2014, 03:31 PM
The Mormon god is not the God of the bible, not the God of the old testament, not the God of the law and the prophets, nor the God that Jesus prayed to and taught us about....(and that's why the Mormons need to have their own bible, and their own prophets :))

LDSinc. Act like the middle child, aways wanting attention. Joseph Smith jr. Went about looking for attention and it has never stopped. Sad to say mormonlandism has an eternal consequences of which for the TBM doesn't end will. This we try and bring to their attention, but with little success. Oh, Satan has worked his web so well with his servent Joseph Smith jr.

alanmolstad
02-04-2014, 03:40 PM
LDSinc. Act like the middle child, always wanting attention. ......so I take it you are not a middle child then?... :)

Christian
02-04-2014, 05:40 PM
e posted:

Originally Posted by ChristianTo demonstrate that EVEN ONE PERSON ANYWHERE could vouch for the supposed accuracy of smith's translation.


And I've produced three people who vouched for the accuracy of the translation, just not in the way that you demand (moving the goalposts).

No, you have produced only three people who SAID THEY HEARD A VOICE. Why should we believe them? 13 members of the Utah lds church in Pocatello, Idaho also said they heard Jesus AND SAW HIM ON THE MOUNTAINSIDE and He told them the current lds church had apostasized.

Why should we believe those three who said they heard a voice, but not believe the 13 who swore in a booklet they signed and published, sending a copy to every household in Pocatello about 30 years ago?

Are your 'voices' better than your 'jesus?'


BTW, WHY (if it was accurately translated) were over 4,000 CHANGES required to get from the first version to the version you have now???!!!

Mostly to standardize the grammar and punctuation and correct m****cript and typesetting errors, and some clarifications.

But also to completely change many wordings, paragraphs, etc so they made better sense to the mormons.


As I said, you have NOBODY but joe smith to vouch for ANY of the story he made up in his book but JOE SMITH HIMSELF.
Yes you said that, but you're wrong. I've produced three additional witnesses, so your claim is proven false.

No, you have provided 'hearsay' evidence, people who have NEVER COMPARED ANYTHING, but SAY they have heard voices.

One man who offered me a cigar a few years ago said God had told him he would be the next presidend of the United States; I should vote for him. It didn't happen. He wasn't on the ballot at all, never became even a dog-catcher. Was the president of a 3 member motorcycle club though. . .

in the Name of the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ,
morefish (who does NOT believe the fairytale teller joe smith at all)

Christian
02-04-2014, 05:42 PM
The claim is that they were translated by the gift and power of God, not that God was physically there in the room with him, helping him translate.

But of course it appeared one line at a time, and when that was transcribed correctly, that line disappeared and was replaced by the NEXT line.

But it looks like YOUR god screwed up. It had to be 'repaired.'

In the Name of the BIBLICAL Jesus,
morefish

Phoenix
02-06-2014, 04:56 PM
Please clarify. Are you perhaps saying that you believe Jesus, the Son of God is a con artist?
Of course not. How did you manage to end up thinking that?


Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
The con-operator will always be in control of his eviroment and the tool inwhich he use to complete the confidence trick.

The above criteria could be used by an atheist to accuse Jesus of being a con artist. In my opinion, neither Jesus nor Joseph Smith deserve to be accused using those criteria. So it's not me who is accusing anyone at all. I am just saying that those who insist on accusing Joseph Smith or the Book of Mormon, should think twice, because their criteria could apply to Jesus or the Bible, if they are not careful. That's the problem with accusing other people--you have to be very careful when choosing what your accusation is based on, or the whole thing could backfire on you.

neverending
02-06-2014, 05:36 PM
Of course not. How did you manage to end up thinking that?



The above criteria could be used by an atheist to accuse Jesus of being a con artist. In my opinion, neither Jesus nor Joseph Smith deserve to be accused using those criteria. So it's not me who is accusing anyone at all. I am just saying that those who insist on accusing Joseph Smith or the Book of Mormon, should think twice, because their criteria could apply to Jesus or the Bible, if they are not careful. That's the problem with accusing other people--you have to be very careful when choosing what your accusation is based on, or the whole thing could backfire on you.

Your thinking is faulty Phoenix. First off, atheists don't even believe there is a God let alone Jesus Christ. The Bible is history where places and people can be verified that once existed and some still exist today i.e. cities, countries, even wells. Can the same be said of the BoM? Not one of the cities mentioned in that book has ever been found. The LDS Church won't even allow archaeologists to dig on the Hill Cumorah, why? Wouldn't the church want to find evidence of a great battle that is mentioned in that book? If evidence was found, wouldn't that prove the validity of the BoM? So, when there is reason to accuse, people have the right to bring things to light. And nothing is going to backfire.

Phoenix
02-07-2014, 07:19 PM
Your thinking is faulty Phoenix.
i don't think it is faulty.


First off, atheists don't even believe there is a God let alone Jesus Christ.
they probably believe that a person named Jesus existed in the 1st century, who used magic tricks and words to convince some gullible people that he was the son of deity. Some anti-lds people use the "con man" argument to accuse Joseph Smith, similar to how atheists can use it against Jesus' claims.


Wouldn't the church want to find evidence of a great battle that is mentioned in that book?
I hope not, because most or all of the new converts who joined the church based on that evidence, wouldn't be strong, faithful members. They would be trend-following members, their faith would be archaeology-based, and that's not the right foundation for a Christian's faith to have. If a newer discovery seemed to refute the former one, what will happen to the faith of those members? It will rise and fall with each announcement from some archaeologist, and be like an anchorless ship on the ocean, ****n left and right as the wind changes direction. Strong, lasting faith comes from a spiritual conviction, not from the Smithsonian. Having the Holy Spirit witness to your spirit that something (the Bible's claims, the BOM's claims, the reality of Jesus' love for you, etc.) is true, is the kind of conviction that can last when trials of your faith hit you--when others are mocking your beliefs, when sickness, unemployment, family strife, etc. make the going tough.
I will take a spiritual witness over 10 archaeological discoveries.


And nothing is going to backfire. [/SIZE]
An accusation that is so ill-considered that it can be used against one's own beliefs, is likely to backfire.

neverending
02-07-2014, 11:00 PM
i don't think it is faulty.


they probably believe that a person named Jesus existed in the 1st century, who used magic tricks and words to convince some gullible people that he was the son of deity. Some anti-lds people use the "con man" argument to accuse Joseph Smith, similar to how atheists can use it against Jesus' claims.


I hope not, because most or all of the new converts who joined the church based on that evidence, wouldn't be strong, faithful members. They would be trend-following members, their faith would be archaeology-based, and that's not the right foundation for a Christian's faith to have. If a newer discovery seemed to refute the former one, what will happen to the faith of those members? It will rise and fall with each announcement from some archaeologist, and be like an anchorless ship on the ocean, ****n left and right as the wind changes direction. Strong, lasting faith comes from a spiritual conviction, not from the Smithsonian. Having the Holy Spirit witness to your spirit that something (the Bible's claims, the BOM's claims, the reality of Jesus' love for you, etc.) is true, is the kind of conviction that can last when trials of your faith hit you--when others are mocking your beliefs, when sickness, unemployment, family strife, etc. make the going tough.
I will take a spiritual witness over 10 archaeological discoveries.


An accusation that is so ill-considered that it can be used against one's own beliefs, is likely to backfire.

"...because most or all of the new converts who joined the church based on that evidence, wouldn't be strong, faithful members. They would be trend-following members, their faith would be archaeology-based, and that's not the right foundation for a Christian's faith to have." Now this is definitely faulty thinking because if your church found evidence of all that has been written in your BOM, that would only strengthen a members faith. I don't understand your way of thinking at all. I've already said that we have evidence of the Bible, it contains historical evidence of people and places that HAVE been verified through archaeology. There is nothing wrong in proving that what is told in your BoM is true. And as for evidence NOT being found and what effect it would have on members, you don't have the right to think for other members, it would be up to each individual would it not? If members truly have faith in their leaders and the doctrines, I think nothing would cause them to be, "****n left and right as the wind changes." I can see that you are afraid to discover truth about your faith, and that is why your reasoning is faulty.

Going by this "spiritual conviction" isn't always the best way to accept doctrines for an evil spirit can give you a good feeling. NEVER go by feelings! I believe the witnesses to the BoM only made their statements to please JS. To claim they saw the plates only through spiritual eyes, leaves one to doubt the truthfulness of their testimonies. I will take archaeological evidence any day, which is TRUE evidence that something did exist. Psalm 22....it is evidence that Jesus is the Christ. The words of this Psalm was over 900 years before the birth of Jesus it was also a prophesy that came true. How does that lessen one's faith? Don't you want to know the truth?

Phoenix
02-08-2014, 03:24 PM
"...because most or all of the new converts who joined the church based on that evidence, wouldn't be strong, faithful members. They would be trend-following members, their faith would be archaeology-based, and that's not the right foundation for a Christian's faith to have." Now this is definitely faulty thinking because if your church found evidence of all that has been written in your BOM, that would only strengthen a members faith.
Even though Judas saw Jesus do lots of miraculous stuff, it didn't make him a more faithful disciple.

Some "traditional" Christians claim the Bible has an overwhelming amount of proof to support its claims, yet "traditional" Christianity has lots of wishy-washy members, members who are leaving for other religions, etc. Has the abundance of evidence for the Bible really strengthened the faith of traditional Christians? If Noah's ark was discovered next month, would it cause weak Christians to suddenly start attending church, loving their neighbor, feeding the homeless, and acting like the true disciples they should have been all along?


I don't understand your way of thinking at all.
My way of thinking comes from many years of observing people's behavior, and learning what motivates them and what doesn't.


I've already said that we have evidence of the Bible, it contains historical evidence of people and places that HAVE been verified through archaeology.
That didn't do much for Bart Ehrman's faith. In fact, look at some of the people who leave the LDS church and become atheists--why didn't all that Bible evidence keep their faith in the Bible strong?


There is nothing wrong in proving that what is told in your BoM is true.
Claims by some archaeologist are, as a rule, a poor subs***ute for a witness from God that comes as a blessing after a person has demonstrated faith. In other words, it usually doesn't work to take a faithless person, show him some artifact, and have that create faith and turn him into a person of faith.


And as for evidence NOT being found and what effect it would have on members, you don't have the right to think for other members, it would be up to each individual would it not?
YOU don't the have to right to decide how much evidence for the Book of Mormon God should allow to be discovered, or when He should allow its discovery.


I can see that you are afraid to discover truth about your faith, and that is why your reasoning is faulty.
I had strong faith in the reality of God & Jesus, and in the veracity of the Bible and Book of Mormon, before I learned of the evidences supporting the Bible and the Book of Mormon--and I continued to have faith in them after I knew about the evidence. I can't say that knowing of the evidence has made me a better Christian, or a more faithful LDS.
In my experience, a faith that isn't tested is a faith that can't get as strong as it could be. How strong does your faith need to be, if every Bible claim has been verified by the Smithsonian to be true? How strong CAN your faith be, in such a situation?

It seems you don't really understand faith.

alanmolstad
02-08-2014, 03:36 PM
If Noah's ark was discovered next month, would it cause weak Christians to suddenly start attending church, loving their neighbor, feeding the homeless, and acting like the true disciples they should have been all along?


It's an interesting question...
Im not sure anyone knows for sure.

I do remember that even after God parted the red sea a few days later the Jews were already worshiping a different god, so that seems to suggest that miracles tend to not build up a person's faith like you would expect.....odd but kinda true.

James Banta
02-08-2014, 04:04 PM
No, he was not the only one: Jesus was there, too, and He saw God. (It would be hard for Jesus NOT to see Him, since Jesus was standing directly to His right) :cool:;):p

Isn't Jesus God? (John 1:1, Isaiah 9:6).. If Jesus is God who else but Smith was there to see God? You have two out here: 1. teach that Jesus is not God.. Or 2. teach that there is more than one God.. IHS jim

Phoenix
02-11-2014, 05:41 AM
It's an interesting question...
Im not sure anyone knows for sure.

I do remember that even after God parted the red sea a few days later the Jews were already worshiping a different god, so that seems to suggest that miracles tend to not build up a person's faith like you would expect.....odd but kinda true.

Yes, you made a good point with that example. Thanks for adding it to the discussion.

alanmolstad
02-11-2014, 06:32 AM
I had remembered that a topic like this came up one time during a bible study we were in at church bible cl***.
If i remember correctly we were in a study about the Exodus, and all the acts of God that were seen in Egypt at the time.

One of the girls in the cl*** asked why such mighty acts were not seen anymore?

She was very upset in that in the old days god was working and doing all kinds of things to prove Himself and his power, but in our world god is totally silent.
She was very frustrated by God's lack of action in our world, when she felt that it could totally change the whole world if God were to do a few things.


In cl*** we discussed what actions we would like to see God do?

We talked about how anything God were to do in our modern world would be interpreted by the media and the unbelieving world?

One of the conclusions we came to is that , sadly, the results would be almost nil.
We read how the greatest acts in the Old Testament (parting of the Red Sea) seems to have very little effect on the Jews who were right there to eye-witness it.

30 to 40 days later the Jews had switched gods and were setting up idols.

James Banta
02-11-2014, 09:29 AM
I had remembered that a topic like this came up one time during a bible study we were in at church bible cl***.
If i remember correctly we were in a study about the Exodus, and all the acts of God that were seen in Egypt at the time.

One of the girls in the cl*** asked why such mighty acts were not seen anymore?

She was very upset in that in the old days god was working and doing all kinds of things to prove Himself and his power, but in our world god is totally silent.
She was very frustrated by God's lack of action in our world, when she felt that it could totally change the whole world if God were to do a few things.


In cl*** we discussed what actions we would like to see God do?

We talked about how anything God were to do in our modern world would be interpreted by the media and the unbelieving world?

One of the conclusions we came to is that , sadly, the results would be almost nil.
We read how the greatest acts in the Old Testament (parting of the Red Sea) seems to have very little effect on the Jews who were right there to eye-witness it.

30 to 40 days later the Jews had switched gods and were setting up idols.

Jesus promised us that we would do even greater thing than He did. Do we not do marvelous works in His name? Every years millions are feed by the Church. Suffering of those caught up in disaster receive help and care during their darkest hours. Wells are dug, schools and hospitals built and staffed. All the while the Gospel is being spread.. God isn't doing anything? Have you heard the old story of the man working up on his roof when he started to slide off to a certain death in the spiked wrought iron fence below? He called out "GOD HELP ME". Then his pant leg got stuck on a nail and he said "Oh, never mind". That is the same lack of thankfulness and faith that this young woman of your Bible study was showing.. Today GOD works mightily through His Church.. Never before in the history of man has there been a people so dedicated to the service of others without seeing some personal gain involved in their kindnesses.. IHS jim

RealFakeHair
02-11-2014, 10:09 AM
Jesus promised us that we would do even greater thing than He did. Do we not do marvelous works in His name? Every years millions are feed by the Church. Suffering of those caught up in disaster receive help and care during their darkest hours. Wells are dug, schools and hospitals built and staffed. All the while the Gospel is being spread.. God isn't doing anything? Have you heard the old story of the man working up on his roof when he started to slide off to a certain death in the spiked wrought iron fence below? He called out "GOD HELP ME". Then his pant leg got stuck on a nail and he said "Oh, never mind". That is the same lack of thankfulness and faith that this young woman of your Bible study was showing.. Today GOD works mightily through His Church.. Never before in the history of man has there been a people so dedicated to the service of others without seeing some personal gain involved in their kindnesses.. IHS jim

Joseph Smith jr. Imaginary mind was on the Ancent Aliens TV show last night; how funny is that?
If any Christian witness the show they must have laugh their heads off, but of course the TBMs here most have loved having their religion compared to little green Martins from Mars.

James Banta
02-12-2014, 09:52 AM
Joseph Smith jr. Imaginary mind was on the Ancent Aliens TV show last night; how funny is that?
If any Christian witness the show they must have laugh their heads off, but of course the TBMs here most have loved having their religion compared to little green Martins from Mars.


I missed it.. Can you share with me the actual ***le of that episode? IHS jim

RealFakeHair
02-12-2014, 09:59 AM
I missed it.. Can you share with me the actual ***le of that episode? IHS jim

I can't remember the ***le of the program other than it was on the Ancent Aliens show on Direct channel 271