Second Thoughts

[_Ray A]

More specifically, I'm trying to learn how there could have been no real 'tangible' plates, yet Joseph Smith not be considered a 'fraud'. In other words, telling someone that there are real 'tangible' plates under this cloth, when there weren't real 'tangible' plates under the cloth - how can that not be considered fraudulent (unless of course you believe that he knew he was intentionally being deceitful, but doing it for some 'greater good'). Of course I have a problem with this though, as I can't fathom a God who would deceive millions of members of his one true church by leading them to believe that there were actual gold plates, when, in fact, there weren't. In that case, you could say that God is a fraud.

You have to examine all of the accounts. Some indicate tangibility, others visionary. There is no reason there could not have been both tangible plates and "vision trance" accounts. That is exactly what the accounts indicate. Martin Harris says on one occasion he "only saw them in vision", then in another account he says he "felt the plates". Whitmer has the same conflation.

As for the fraud aspect, this is Vogel's theory, "pious fraud". He may well have made up plates to "enhance the faith" of those who followed him. I agree that this is deceptive, if this is the case, but he would have seen it as a "means" to enhance faith.

Draw your own conclusions, it does not matter to me whether you think "God is a fraud" (whatever that may mean).

There's still no answer to my question: How was the Book of Mormon produced?

[_Sam Harris]

Ok, Runtu...

I personally do not think you should go, simply because of your wife's emotional tendencies. First of all, many Mormon women (NOT all!) are weepy. Annoys the hell out of me. Also, you could be getting manipulated, slim. Seriously, when you're in any kind of relationship with someone, and the norm falls out, you're not doing what you were before, some sort of dysfunction comes into the picture, or in your case, you "wake up", those who are used to the status quo will try to keep you guiltily in place. Trust me. My mom tries that pouty **** on me all the time. And yes, I feel bad, but at the end of the day, overall I'm still right with regards to what the problem is between us (another story, another time).

I'm with PP on this one, your wife meeting you halfway would mean that you get to stay home, and she goes to church if she wants to. Crying to get her way isn't very fair. Sure, it's hurting her, and you understand why, but disillusion is never comfortable. For you to go would be to validate her stance. She's going to try to change you, make you back into the good old Peter Priesthood that you were, and that will cause more problems in the long run.

Stay home. Watch Spike and ESPN...or the Food Network, whatever floats your boat. I'm no longer LDS, but I can't always make it to church, either. That has nothing to do with my relationship with God. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Pisses me off when people think that somehow you're going to be a better person for going to church...when the evidence to the contrary is so, well...evident.

[_Ray A]

I would like to hear your theory of Book of Mormon production.

Ray, can I respectfully ask, "Why do we need to provide an alternate theory of the crime?"

Because criminality has nothing to do with this. It's off the point. So tell me, how does a 23 year old produce a 500 page book in some 65 days. If you have a theory something akin to Spalding or Rigdon which is conclusive, I'd like to see it. Dale Broadhurst has produced some evidences of connections, but even he admits it's not proof. There is no "tangible" evidence there either. You'd think by now someone would have nailed it, wouldn't you? So it can be laid out for all to see that the production was obvious fraud.

[_Who Knows]

You have to examine all of the accounts. Some indicate tangibility, others visionary. There is no reason there could not have been both tangible plates and "vision trance" accounts. That is exactly what the accounts indicate. Martin harris says on one occasion he "only saw them in vision", then in another account he says he "felt the plates". Whitmer has the same conflation.

As for the fraud aspect, this is Vogel's theory, "pious fraud". He may well have made up plates to "enhance the faith" of those who followed him. I agree that this is deceptive, if this is the case, but he would have seen it as a "means" to enhance faith.

Draw your own conclusions, it does not matter to me whether you think "God is a fraud" (whatever that may mean).

Ok. Well, a pious fraud is still a fraud. And given the various accounts of the 'tangibility' of the plates, i'm left to conclude that either Joseph Smith was telling the truth, and that the plates he had were actually ancient gold plates, or they were fake - making him a fraud - whether you want to call him pious or not.

Joseph Smith claimed to have tangible ancient gold plates. He either did or he didn't. It makes no difference to me whether he was pious in his fraud or not. He was either telling the truth, or he was a fraud. (or, thirdly as i mentioned earlier, extremely delusional / schizophrenic).

There's still no answer to my question: How was the Book of Mormon produced?

And there may very well never be an answer...

[_Ray A]

There's still no answer to my question: How was the Book of Mormon produced?

And there may very well never be an answer...

I believe there is an answer, and that is automatic writing. Regardless of any fraud regarding the plates, I believe this explains the Book of Mormon production.

[_Ray A]

Was he channeling?


'splain please.

Basically, yes. Here is one link which explains some of the theory.

http://www.prairieghosts.com/auto_writing.html

The information can also come from the subconscious mind, personal experiences, and external sources, and has often been accurate. There is no scientific explanation for this.

[_Who Knows]

There's still no answer to my question: How was the Book of Mormon produced?

And there may very well never be an answer...

I believe there is an answer, and that is automatic writing. Regardless of any fraud regarding the plates, I believe this explains the Book of Mormon production.

It's as good an explanation as any.

[_MormonMendacity]

There's still no answer to my question: How was the Book of Mormon produced?

And there may very well never be an answer...

I believe there is an answer, and that is automatic writing. Regardless of any fraud regarding the plates, I believe this explains the Book of Mormon production.

It's as good an explanation as any.

True. As long as we're taking any goofball explanations like that one we could also just believe Joseph's angel story. It seems as reasonable as any other woo-woo idea.

[_Ray A]

True. As long as we're taking any goofball explanations like that one we could also just believe Joseph's angel story. It seems as reasonable as any other woo-woo idea.

It might be a "woo-woo" idea to you, but although there is no scientific explanation it is being taken seriously by more scientists. Continental drift was once a "woo-woo" idea, too. I expect closed minds on this subject, but I'm very much open to it. It's no more "woo-woo" than the Spalding theory, which has established precisely nothing, nor does it fit the facts of how the Book of Mormon was produced from first hand witnesses who were involved in the "translation". The automatic writing theory fits better than any. Unless of course you want to believe that the Book of Mormon is actually history.

[_Dr. Shades]

Because criminality has nothing to do with this. It's off the point. So tell me, how does a 23 year old produce a 500 page book in some 65 days. If you have a theory something akin to Spalding or Rigdon which is conclusive, I'd like to see it.

It's all in the book I mailed you.