MAD's Martha Brotherton Thread

[_why me]

I suppose that the Brotherton thread was interesting but at the end of the day, I am not sure just what it proved. And I am sure that if such a story would run today, it would make the front page of the National Enquirer. But so what? Throughout a life, there are many interesting happenings and understandings and Martha and Brigham are no exception, neither are other human beings who were a part of church history back in the good old days.

Life is life and I don't expect blandness from any life. But regardless of Brotherton and what exactly is the truth, the Book of Mormon still stands for what it is. And it hasn't been disproven. And I might add that some of those polygamous wives received devine revelation of the truthfulness of the practice. Martha missed out on something special during her life. And such is life....we all make choices.

[_Mister Scratch]

I am pleased that the Brotherton discussion at MA&D was of sufficient interest to warrant commentary here. I certainly found it to be enlightening as well as enjoyable. And, while I was somewhat disappointed when Don decided to bow out of the discussion (I hope Kevin G. and Scratch don't read anything sinister or pusillanimous into what he did), I do accept his rationale for doing so, and I look forward to reading his paper if/when it is published.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Why would I read anything sinister into Don's behavior? It was clear that he was fed up with the unfair moderating policies, and with Hammer's, yours, and bsix's idiocy. I see nothing "sinister" about that.

[_harmony]

I suppose that the Brotherton thread was interesting but at the end of the day, I am not sure just what it proved. And I am sure that if such a story would run today, it would make the front page of the National Enquirer. But so what? Throughout a life, there are many interesting happenings and understandings and Martha and Brigham are no exception, neither are other human beings who were a part of church history back in the good old days.

Life is life and I don't expect blandness from any life. But regardless of Brotherton and what exactly is the truth, the Book of Mormon still stands for what it is. And it hasn't been disproven. And I might add that some of those polygamous wives received devine revelation of the truthfulness of the practice. Martha missed out on something special during her life. And such is life....we all make choices.

What exactly did she miss out on?

[_Bryan Inks]

Life is life and I don't expect blandness from any life. But regardless of Brotherton and what exactly is the truth, the Book of Mormon still stands for what it is. And it hasn't been disproven.

Forgive me for being myself for just a moment, but BURDEN OF GODDAMN PROOF!

Every study I have ever found, every person that does any semblence of research into the topic has found a grand total of f***-all by way of evidence for the Book of Mormon.

The fact that you keep repeating your little mantra doesn't make it true.

So, time to buck up, play a man (or woman as the case may be) and prove the Book of Mormon.

Can't do it? Guess what. That means it's been disproven. Yay for the scientific method.

[_Fortigurn]

I suppose that the Brotherton thread was interesting but at the end of the day, I am not sure just what it proved.

It proved this, at the very least:

I can see why the Church leaders in question may, themselves, have on ocassion played semantics in order to keep the practice of polygamy private.

To put it another way, it proved that the Church leaders in question lied to the flock in order to maintain the secrecy of a practice in which they were indulging, of which they knew full well others would disapprove.

[_beastie]

I followed the thread for a while and then just starting skimming. Did anyone address why church leaders slandered her by calling her a whore from her mother's breast? And then why did BY have a whore sealed to him?

[_why me]

Life is life and I don't expect blandness from any life. But regardless of Brotherton and what exactly is the truth, the Book of Mormon still stands for what it is. And it hasn't been disproven.

Forgive me for being myself for just a moment, but BURDEN OF GODDAMN PROOF!

Every study I have ever found, every person that does any semblence of research into the topic has found a grand total of f***-all by way of evidence for the Book of Mormon.

The fact that you keep repeating your little mantra doesn't make it true.

So, time to buck up, play a man (or woman as the case may be) and prove the Book of Mormon.

Can't do it? Guess what. That means it's been disproven. Yay for the scientific method.

For members, including for some exers on this board, the proof was in the testimony of the holy ghost testifying of its truthfulness. And that is the rub. Now it is not up to me to prove the holy ghost true, but it is up to you to prove him false. For lds members, the truth is in the witness. For people like yourself, the proof may be in the science. However, science has not proven the Book of Mormon false.

How can one prove the Bible true? Or the Koran? It can not be done. Likewise for the Book of Mormon. And so, be a man and prove the Book of Mormon false. Can't do it? That must mean that it is true. Hence, the spirit is still working.

God is one big question mark and the most that people can say is: I don't know.

And as far as Brothertom is concerned, well, I stand by what I said. I have no idea what happened at that time and neither does anyone here. Yes, we have papers written by so and so but so what? A paper is just a paper, without emotion and without mind. Too bad we cannot bring back all the parties from the grave and have a nice chat about it all.

[_Bryan Inks]

For members, including for some exers on this board, the proof was in the testimony of the holy ghost testifying of its truthfulness. And that is the rub. Now it is not up to me to prove the holy ghost true, but it is up to you to prove him false. For lds members, the truth is in the witness. For people like yourself, the proof may be in the science. However, science has not proven the Book of Mormon false.

Do we really need to relearn what Burden of Proof means?

You make the claim that the Holy Ghost is/or teaches Truth. Therefore, you need to prove the Holy Ghost exists and is/or teaches said Truth.

I don't throw out these silly requirements that you must disprove Intelligent Falling or The Giant, F****** Invisible, Intangible Spider in My Backyard.

Then again. . . I don't claim either is real or truth.

How can one prove the Bible true? Or the Koran? It can not be done. Likewise for the Book of Mormon. And so, be a man and prove the Book of Mormon false. Can't do it? That must mean that it is true. Hence, the spirit is still working.

A. I don't see anyone claiming that the Bible is true. Nor the Qur'an. So stop blowing smoke up our collective asses.

B. Science has pretty much disproven everything in the Book of Mormon. No multi-million man, apocalyptical battles. No steel, horses, elephants, chariots, coins. No pre-Columbian Christianity. No Jews or the decendents thereof.

Yeah. . . I'd say that pretty much disproves the Book of Mormon as being "true". Now, before your garments get in a twist, I'm not saying that there are not true principles included. But there are also true principles in Star Wars and that doesn't make it "true".

Eat cake not mud and just admit it.

God is one big question mark and the most that people can say is: I don't know.

Except you aren't saying that. In fact, you are claiming that God isn't a "big question mark" but is in reality a "giant exclamation point".

[_Sethbag]

I suppose that the Brotherton thread was interesting but at the end of the day, I am not sure just what it proved. And I am sure that if such a story would run today, it would make the front page of the National Enquirer. But so what? Throughout a life, there are many interesting happenings and understandings and Martha and Brigham are no exception, neither are other human beings who were a part of church history back in the good old days.

Life is life and I don't expect blandness from any life. But regardless of Brotherton and what exactly is the truth, the Book of Mormon still stands for what it is. And it hasn't been disproven. And I might add that some of those polygamous wives received devine revelation of the truthfulness of the practice. Martha missed out on something special during her life. And such is life....we all make choices.

What exactly did she miss out on?

She missed out on being Brigham's 37th wife. Duh! What do you mean, what did she miss out on? What could possibly have been better than being one of Brigham's 37 wives?

Why Me, has the Quran been disproven? Do you believe, and stake your life on anything that isn't disproven? Do you believe in the orbiting teapot?

[_why me]

For members, including for some exers on this board, the proof was in the testimony of the holy ghost testifying of its truthfulness. And that is the rub. Now it is not up to me to prove the holy ghost true, but it is up to you to prove him false. For lds members, the truth is in the witness. For people like yourself, the proof may be in the science. However, science has not proven the Book of Mormon false.

Do we really need to relearn what Burden of Proof means?

You make the claim that the Holy Ghost is/or teaches Truth. Therefore, you need to prove the Holy Ghost exists and is/or teaches said Truth.

I don't throw out these silly requirements that you must disprove Intelligent Falling or The Giant, F****** Invisible, Intangible Spider in My Backyard.

Then again. . . I don't claim either is real or truth.

How can one prove the Bible true? Or the Koran? It can not be done. Likewise for the Book of Mormon. And so, be a man and prove the Book of Mormon false. Can't do it? That must mean that it is true. Hence, the spirit is still working.

A. I don't see anyone claiming that the Bible is true. Nor the Qur'an. So stop blowing smoke up our collective asses.

B. Science has pretty much disproven everything in the Book of Mormon. No multi-million man, apocalyptical battles. No steel, horses, elephants, chariots, coins. No pre-Columbian Christianity. No Jews or the decendents thereof.

Yeah. . . I'd say that pretty much disproves the Book of Mormon as being "true". Now, before your garments get in a twist, I'm not saying that there are not true principles included. But there are also true principles in Star Wars and that doesn't make it "true".

Eat cake not mud and just admit it.

God is one big question mark and the most that people can say is: I don't know.

Except you aren't saying that. In fact, you are claiming that God isn't a "big question mark" but is in reality a "giant exclamation point".

Since the critics spend a great amount of time trying to disprove the Book of Mormon and have failed, I can see your point. If proven it false has been impossible, then I can see your point in turning the burden of proof to those who believe the book to be true.

Plus, muslims who believe in the Koran do believe that it is true. It is not up to muslims to prove its truthfulness but it is up to critics of islam to prove it wrong. Plus, there are many Bible believing christians who believe the Bible is true. How can they prove it to be true and why should they? However, for atheists, they would need to prove it false.

And yes, I can claim that atheists cannot claim that there is no god, since god cannot be disproven. The most a critic can say is: I don't know. And even dawkins in his God Delusion book cannot say that there is no god, although he does claim to do so...but he cannot prove it through science. Thus, the question mark for atheists.