Smith made sure nobody could SEE anything. . .

[Christian]

They couldn't 'see' what was printed on the supposed plates. They couldn't 'see' the plates later to see if they were 'translated' correctly. They couldn't 'see' any evidence of any 'Nephites' ever existing in the real world. You are supposed to BLINDLY BELIEVE that joey smith saw ANYONE/ANYTHING in the woods.

JESUS did HIS 'thing' out in the open before THOUSANDS of witnesses.
The Apostles did their 'thing' in the open before THOUSANDS of witnesses.
joey smith. . .requires hidden handshakes, tokens, special underwear, and magical phrases to do HIS 'thing.'

Comments?

in Jesus,
fish

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by Christian

They couldn't 'see' what was printed on the supposed plates.

You're mistaken. At least eleven other people saw the engravings on the plates.

[alanmolstad]

As for the issue of not allowing people to see the plates:

Here is what i think of that whole topic.

If I were wanting to fool people, then I would do about the same as what Smith did.

If I had some fake plates that I made myself, and then came up with a story about finding them in the backyard, the last thing I would do is try to really prove my story to people.

I would NEVER send them off to a University to be researched!

In-fact, i would never want the plates photographed even!

I would hide them.....under the bed if guests came over that I didn't know...
I would make sure that the people that did see them had some type of investment in them being real before I let them see them, and i would NEVER allow the plates to examined by scientists or real researchers or anyone for the matter who were not members already of my inner circle .

The idea i would have is that any person i even allow to glimpse quickly the plates would have a vested interest in the plates being real,

After all the best way to fool people is to get people to fool themselves.




On the other hand, it does kinda mean also that a lot of people are going to be wise to the scam I'm pulling on people because of the way I'm hiding the plates from being studied and verified as would be the real case if I actually had found some plates in my backyard.

I mean, lets face it, if I actually did dig up something ( like a dinosaur bone, or plates of Gold) my first response would be to call in some experts from the University to come have a look and take the bone off for study.

I do know that at work one time we dug down 36 'feet and found a tree branch with bark on it.
I took it to the guy who is in charge of the University geology department and he dated it between 8,000 and 18,000 years for me .

One time we also dug down about 10 feet at work and found a bone that I took to a local University professor and it was identified as a Bison foot bone from a young animal....again likely 100s of years old.

So I do understand the difference between what would be expected if the thing a person claims to have found is FAKE or not.

[Christian]

Originally Posted by Erundur

You're mistaken. At least eleven other people saw the engravings on the plates.

NOT ONE of them saw any engravings THEY COULD UNDERSTAND. NOT ONE could say 'yep, Joe got it right' regarding the supposed 'translation' of those plates. . .

NOT ONE.

In the Name of Jesus,
fish

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Christian

NOT ONE of them saw any engravings THEY COULD UNDERSTAND. NOT ONE could say 'yep, Joe got it right' regarding the supposed 'translation' of those plates. . .

NOT ONE.

In the Name of Jesus,
fish

Remember the lost 119 pages. Oh jo was smart not to re-translate them. I wonder why?

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by Christian

NOT ONE of them saw any engravings THEY COULD UNDERSTAND.

Much better.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

As for the issue of not allowing people to see the plates:
Here is what i think of that whole topic.
If I were wanting to fool people, then I would do about the same as what Smith did.

Didn't Moses do about the same as what Smith did--he claimed that God had written commandments on a piece of rock, and everyone had to take his word for it since he made sure that he was the only "witness" to this miraculous recording process?

If I had some fake plates that I made myself, and then came up with a story about finding them in the backyard, the last thing I would do is try to really prove my story to people.
I would NEVER send them off to a University to be researched!

Did Moses ever send the stone 10 commandments tablets off to The Hebrew University to be researched? No

In-fact, i would never want the plates photographed even!

Did Moses ever allow the stone 10 commandments tablets to be photographed? No

I would hide them.....under the bed if guests came over that I didn't know...

Didn't Moses hide the stone 10 commandments tablets inside a box and forbid everyone except a few chosen ones to look inside?

I would make sure that the people that did see them had some type of investment in them being real before I let them see them

Didn't Moses make sure that the only people allowed to look inside the Ark were men, men who had some type of investment in his religion?

, and i would NEVER allow the plates to examined by scientists or real researchers or anyone for the matter who were not members already of my inner circle .

And Moses never did any of that stuff. Am I wrong?

After all the best way to fool people is to get people to fool themselves.

Isn't that what anti-Semites could say about Jews who believe that those stone tablets really existed, and were really written on by God Himself--that the best way to fool people is to get people to fool themselves?

I mean, lets face it, if I actually did dig up something ( like a dinosaur bone, or plates of Gold) my first response would be to call in some experts from the University to come have a look and take the bone off for study.

But let's face it--if God had led you the thing you dug up, and it was something sacred, and God had told you NOT to call in experts from the University, you'd probably obey God....wouldn't you?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Didn't Moses do about the same as what Smith did--

you mean part the Red Sea?......yes i remember it was in all the papers........quite a thing to behold....brought a tear to my eye...

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

you mean part the Red Sea?......yes i remember it was in all the papers.....

Not in any Egyptian papers, apparently....

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Not in any Egyptian papers, apparently....

oh I don't know about that....have you checked the Reformed-Egyptian Times for a story about Smith parting the Red Sea?

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

oh I don't know about that....have you checked the Reformed-Egyptian Times for a story about Smith parting the Red Sea?

Can you post a HTML link to it?

[alanmolstad]

I don't think it was actually Moses that inspired Smith when he was developing his cover story, however there is a source that I think is very credible as being what Smith had in mind at the time.

While the connections between Smith's religious teachings and the masons is strong and well documented, I actually think that there is a stronger source of inspiration that Joe Smith relied on when he dreamed up his back-story/cover-story to his Goldenish Plates.

I think that Smith took aspects from the traditional story behind the Quran and used it as his framework for the story he invented for the Plate's so-called "discovery".

Back in Bible school I learned about different religions and their history.
One of the things I noticed is that the way Smith seems to have been inspired by the story told about the origin of Islam.

(Muslims believe that the Quran was verbally revealed from God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel.)


I think Smith was inspired by the romance of the mystical teachings of Islam's beginnings, and about the history of the Holy land.
I think that Smith saw in the story of the origin of Islam a type of theme that he liked.
The way the Quran is so venerated by believers.
The way the Quran is seen as being so perfectly translated to people from heaven.
The way that Muhammad is honored, and that he every word is taken as being directly from God , person-to-person.
Even the use of the term "Prophet" in Islam seems to be an influence here.

Now as far as the idea of putting a rock in a hat?...and where that idea came from?....Thats another subject...LOL

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

if God had led you the thing you dug up, and it was something sacred, and God had told you NOT to call in experts from the University, you'd probably obey God....wouldn't you?

I think a while back I went into this question before, perhaps with Fig?....

Im not sure what we were talking about at the time, but at some point in our conversation we came to the similar question of "Would Alan do something God told him to do, if what God said went against the teachings of the Bible?"

My answer then is the same answer I got now....my answer is "No!"


Now this struck some posters here as being contradictory of me , in that I claim to be a good Christian and a true believer in God, yet if I was ever told a message by God, (or an angel sent by God) that disagreed with what I read in the bible, that I would disregard the newer message in favor of the Bible's message.

But my reasons for this are based on the scripture that the "faith" was once for all delivered to us.
There is nothing new coming down the pipe....Nothing new that changes what is already taught.

Therefore if any spirit, angel, or a divine being claiming to be 'a god' brings me a message that is different than what we already have in the Bible I would reject it instantly.

I also remember that one Bible verse that specifically warned us about things like Mormonism that are going to pop up in the later days, and to be on guard against them.





Therefore...um...where was I?
One moment while I review what I started talking about...


Oh yes, the question of God telling me stuff that is crazy and my following them?....ahh...My answer is, "Not a chance".

Jesus was a ministry of openness, Nothing Jesus taught was in secret....nothing was to remain hidden.
So if God ever did decide to send Alan a message?, well thats fine with me as long as the good Lord conforms his message to being in complete agreement with what is already taught in the Bible, then I got no issues with it.


But if God were to send me an angel with a message, and a new set of teachings that go against the Bible?.....I believe my response to that angel would be "Bite me"

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

"Would Alan do something God told him to do, if what God said went against the teachings of the Bible?" My answer then is the same answer I got now....my answer is "No!"

... I was ever told a message by God, (or an angel sent by God) that disagreed with what I read in the bible, that I would disregard the newer message in favor of the Bible's message.

What if Abraham had thought that way when God gave him a message to cut his son open? What if Abraham had said "That disagrees with what I read in the scriptures, so bite me" ?

Therefore if any spirit, angel, or a divine being claiming to be 'a god' brings me a message that is different than what we already have in the Bible I would reject it instantly.

What if the Holy Spirit told a pre-tribber that the rapture will happen after the tribulation? To a pre-tribber, that message would be different than what we already have in the Bible, so if the pre-tribber instantly rejected that message from the Holy Spirit, would that be a good thing?

Oh yes, the question of God telling me stuff that is crazy and my following them?....ahh...My answer is, "Not a chance".

Don't you think Abraham thought the message to slaughter his son Isaac was stuff that was crazy? Should Abraham have said "not a chance" ? Was that the correct response? What does the Bible have to say about whether he made the right choice or not?

But if God were to send me an angel with a message, and a new set of teachings that go against the Bible?.....I believe my response to that angel would be "Bite me"

If God sent an angel to a Catholic with the message that Mary didn't live a sinless life, then to the Catholic that would be a new set of teachings that go against the Bible. Should the Catholic tell the angel "bite me" ?

Isn't it more correct to say that if God were to send you an angel with a message that goes against your preconceptions of what the Bible teaches, you would automatically jump to the conclusion that it's the angel who is going against the Bible, and not you, even though the converse is possibly true?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

What if Abraham had ....

Abraham was under the Old Covenant, the Christian is under the New.
The Old was never as good as the New....

The Christian has "faith" in the New Covenant, and it is this "faith" that has been given "once for all"

So there is no new this or new that is coming down the pike....

it's all here,,,now,,ready to be grabbed and taken into the heart!

no need to ask the question- "do I know all the inner secrets?", there are none!

no need to have to follow the silly teachings of false Prophets that really were only in it for the girls anyway.....They are false!

No need to worry that if you drop away from an organization you will miss the latest teachings from the Lord.....There wont be any!

It's all right here, right now.
It's available to the world.

No need to practice handshakes, no need to put on special clothes, no need to say special words to a person behind a screen.


But if you want to still do the handshake thing, then go get a dog to play with, they love to do that "Shake!" thingy....

[Apologette]

Originally Posted by Erundur

You're mistaken. At least eleven other people saw the engravings on the plates.

Martin Harris, one of the three witnesses, said they saw the plates with their third eye. In other words, in vision.

[Apologette]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

What if Abraham had thought that way when God gave him a message to cut his son open? What if Abraham had said "That disagrees with what I read in the scriptures, so bite me" ?


What if the Holy Spirit told a pre-tribber that the rapture will happen after the tribulation? To a pre-tribber, that message would be different than what we already have in the Bible, so if the pre-tribber instantly rejected that message from the Holy Spirit, would that be a good thing?


Don't you think Abraham thought the message to slaughter his son Isaac was stuff that was crazy? Should Abraham have said "not a chance" ? Was that the correct response? What does the Bible have to say about whether he made the right choice or not?


If God sent an angel to a Catholic with the message that Mary didn't live a sinless life, then to the Catholic that would be a new set of teachings that go against the Bible. Should the Catholic tell the angel "bite me" ?

Isn't it more correct to say that if God were to send you an angel with a message that goes against your preconceptions of what the Bible teaches, you would automatically jump to the conclusion that it's the angel who is going against the Bible, and not you, even though the converse is possibly true?

Calvin, Catholics, blah, blah, blah. Why couldn't people examine the plates? Because they were bogus! We can examine early m****cripts of the Bible, why not some supposed etched plates? I'll tell you why, because they could have been easily detected to be made of tin or some alloy. That's why he kept them covered - and you people buy this idiotic story? By the way, aren't you currently suspended from here?

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by Apologette

Martin Harris, one of the three witnesses, said they saw the plates with their third eye. In other words, in vision.

David Whitmer said, "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." In other words, not just in vision.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Erundur

David Whitmer said, "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, ....

"a spiritual view" eh?
That kids, is one of the more funny sentences I have read in a long time...

Does anybody actually buy into that kinda.....um.....interesting 'answers' ?

It reminds me of something a child would say when they get caught red-handed....


I think the the Mormons should just stick with the cl***ic - "The dog ate it"
It would be a lot more believable.

[alanmolstad]

That reminds me of the excuse that the JWs use .

The JWs predicted for years and years that the Lord would return on a known date.
Well, naturally the date came and went and Jesus did not return.

So in order to put a better spin on things the JWs came up with the excuse that "Jesus did actually return when we predicted, just invisibly"


It's very cl***ic....."Yes, I saw the Golden tablets!"
Well, I mean in the spirit. But I truly saw them!
Yes I saw them, I saw them!
Well, I saw them in a vision, but it was not just a vision because I saw them with my own two eyes.

Well, I mean with my own two spiritual eyes... But they were my very real spiritual eyes!"






There is literally Nothing you could say now that would cause me to think for one moment that the plates were really seen in person by anyone....your witness is a joke guy....

There is nothing you could say that would cause me to take such line of reasoning or excuses serious.

[Zeus]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

that, is one of the more funny sentences I have read in a long time...

Does anybody actually buy into that kinda.....um.....interesting 'answers' ?

It reminds me of something a child would say when they get caught red-handed....


I think the the Mormons should just stick with the cl***ic - "The dog ate it"
It would be a lot more believable.

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

That reminds me of the excuse that the JWs use .

The JWs predicted for years and years that the Lord would return on a known date.
Well, naturally the date came and went and Jesus did not return.

So in order to put a better spin on things the JWs came up with the excuse that "Jesus did actually return when we predicted, just invisibly"


It's very cl***ic....."Yes, I saw the Golden tablets! Well, I mean in the spirit. But I truly saw them! Yes I saw them, I saw them!
Well, I mean with my own spiritual eyes... But they were my very real spiritual eyes!"

Perhaps a little less mocking of others and their beliefs might invite more people to dialogue with you.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Abraham was under the Old Covenant, the Christian is under the New.

Yet both Abraham and Christians have been willing and able to obey God if He tells them to do something, no matter how crazy it sounds to unbelievers. Do you disagree?

The Christian has "faith" in the New Covenant, and it is this "faith" that has been given "once for all"

Shouldn't the Christian have faith in God, too? And be willing to do what He tells the Christian to do, no matter how crazy it is going to sound to unbelievers? What if Peter, James, John, and Paul had told Jesus "You want me to do what? That's crazy, man. Bite me!" ?

But if you want to still do the handshake thing, then go get a dog to play with, they love to do that "Shake!" thingy....

Doesn't the Bible say something about how spiritual things will always seem foolish to the spiritually immature?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Yet both Abraham and Christians have been willing and able to obey God if He tells them to do something, no matter how crazy it sounds to unbelievers. Do you disagree? re?

i believe i made myself very clear already on this same question....

If anyone....a preacher....an angel....a god....a bunch of carpooling gods....peter paul and mary.....or even francis the talking mule say they have a message and that message goes against the message we already have given us in the bible...

"BITE ME!"


so is there any lingering doubts as to my views on this question?.......... anyone?

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

i believe i made myself very clear already on this same question....

If anyone....a preacher....an angel....a god....a bunch of carpooling gods....peter paul and mary.....or even francis the talking mule say they have a message and that message goes against the message we already have given us in the bible...

"BITE ME!"
so is there any lingering doubts as to my views on this question?.......... anyone?

There is the question of why you seem to be avoiding the following questions:

What if Abraham had thought

"If I was ever told a message by God, (or an angel sent by God) that disagreed with my current beliefs about His will, I would disregard the newer message in favor of the Bible's message"

when God gave him a message to cut his son open? What if Abraham had said "That disagrees with what I read in the scriptures, so bite me" ?

What if the Holy Spirit told a pre-tribber that the rapture will happen after the tribulation? To a pre-tribber, that message would be different than what we already have in the Bible, so if the pre-tribber instantly rejected that message from the Holy Spirit, would that be a good thing?


Don't you think Abraham thought the message to slaughter his son Isaac was stuff that was crazy? Should Abraham have said "not a chance" ? Was that the correct response? What does the Bible have to say about whether he made the right choice or not?


If God sent an angel to a Catholic with the message that Mary didn't live a sinless life, then to the Catholic that would be a new set of teachings that go against the Bible. Should the Catholic tell the angel "bite me" ?

Isn't it more correct to say that if God were to send you an angel with a message that goes against your preconceptions of what the Bible teaches, you would automatically jump to the conclusion that it's the angel who is going against the Bible, and not you, even though the converse is possibly true?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

There is the question of why you seem to be avoiding the following questions:

What if Abraham had thought....?

I already answered this issue......see post #15 above.

god can NOT say even one small word that goes against what the bible already teaches.....not one small word!

Now would you like to ask that same question a few more times?....
Do you think if you reword the same question a few different ways that you might get a different answer from me one time?.....
Is that what you are thinking?



Look.... Paul clearly knew what to warn us about dealing with Smith' s claims....
Paul's instructions on how to respond to Smith are clear...


We can go over this time after time.....We can reword the question each time....but the answer of "Bite me'" is still my only answer.


It's not going to ever change.
Because it's the only answer.