CaliforniaKid wrote:But what Joseph Smith didn't realize is that the earth already rotates backwards. It just rotates backwards at a much faster-than-synchronous rate.
And Joseph Smith also unknowingly added the KJV errors of Isaiah to his golden plates. But do the faithful even care about this? Apparently not. And even to this day there still is no king's name in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 even though Mormon revelation claims it. The name doesn't exist and the prophets won't talk about it, surely it must shake their faith.
To say nothing for all those made up astronomical names pertaining to the Book of Abraham and the KEP! Joseph Smith's brain was working overtime. And faithful Mormons dismiss it all as if it means nothing. Amazing!
Juggler Vain wrote:Paul, what do you have against Facsimile No. 2? I mean, Facsimile No. 3 is clearly a botched translation, but Facsimile No. 2 features not only a made-up translation (including translation of a fabricated element), but also affirmative fraud in the way Smith restored its lacunae.
-JV
I find the Explanations of all 3 Facsimiles to be false and total lies made up by Joseph Smith. I particularly enjoy poking fun at the Facsimile No. 3 and shoving it up the noses of Mormons.
However, I'm not here to derail Chris's thread on astronomy. But I do like to remind the Mormons that their Facsimile 3 is a lie. And Mormonism is nothing but lies. The whole Jesus thing is a lie! For God's sake!
CaliforniaKid wrote:A common criticism of the Bible in the post-Copernican era was that Joshua 10:12-3 had said the sun stood still, whereas Copernican astronomy said the sun stood still all the time, and that the apparent motion of the sun was only due to the rotation of the earth. Bible-believers usually rejoined that Joshua was writing from an earthly perspective, and that “the sun stood still” was not to be taken as a scientific statement. In Helaman, Joseph Smith has his ancient prophet preempt the modern critics by offering this apologetic a few thousand years in advance of the controversy, and then explaining the science of it as a side note.
However, Helaman still gets the science wrong.
To understand why it says "the earth goeth back," think about the moon orbiting the earth. We never see the so-called "dark side" of the moon because as it revolves around the earth, it rotates backwards at just the right rate for the same side always to be facing us. This is called synchronous orbit. This is basically the solution Joseph Smith is proposing to the sun-standing-still problem: the earth rotates backwards in a synchronous orbit with the sun. But what Joseph Smith didn't realize is that the earth already rotates backwards. It just rotates backwards at a much faster-than-synchronous rate. In order to achieve the effect he wants, he would only need to greatly slow down the earth's present rotation, not reverse it altogether.
I suppose I don't have to point out that such a dramatic change in the earth's rate of rotation would probably kill everything.
You win!
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
Juggler Vain wrote:I've often wondered why Joseph Smith wasn't a fan of the Book of Mormon.
I think anybody who calls the Book of Mormon "the most correct book" is by definition a fan.
But I agree with Terryl Givens that Joseph Smith viewed the Book of Mormon not so much as a source of doctrinal instruction as a sign of his prophetic calling.
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
Well it was the book he was using to sell himself. I think he means that Joseph never seemed to refer to it much in his sermons.
Juggler Vain wrote:In light of the efforts of Peterson, et al. to demonstrate that the Book of Abraham's astronomy is geocentric, in order to establish its bona fides as an ancient document, what implications does the above apparently heliocentric passage have in the debate over the origins of the Book of Mormon? Using the reasoning of Peterson, et al., doesn't heliocentric astronomy likely place the Book of Mormon in the (post-Copernicus) 19th century?
It seems like this Book of Mormon issue wouldn't be so notable if these apologists weren't publishing about the importance of the geocentric astronomical model in distinguishing between ancient and modern texts. This is more reason to question their strategy, as it arguably results in a net loss for their cause. Establishing the Book of Abraham as a geocentric, and therefore possibly ancient, text doesn't actually favor the conclusion that the text is divine -- it only (marginally) supports their efforts to protect the reputation of Joseph Smith as a seer. This modest increase in their ability to defend Joseph Smith is quickly eclipsed by the scrutiny their argument draws to the Book of Mormon's non-geocentric text, which impairs not only the Book of Mormon's claims to ancient origins, but also Joseph Smith's reputation as a seer.
To the extent that people pay attention to this apologetic work, Mormonism seems to grow weaker on other fronts.
-JV
I see what you did there.
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
So why shouldn't a Geocentric Book of Abraham testify of Christ.
I think DCP et should get a prize for this.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
lulu wrote:For all I know, my anus testifies of Christ.
So why shouldn't a Geocentric Book of Abraham testify of Christ.
I was hoping you would tell me about the "anocentric" (anus+centric) Book of Abraham, but then I remembered that Will Schryver embodied this concept for months.
In other words, you're too damn late! Somebody beat you to the punch.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Themis wrote: Well it was the book he was using to sell himself. I think he means that Joseph never seemed to refer to it much in his sermons.
Themis you are too polite. Joseph Smith did not use the contents of the Book of Mormon in any of his sermons. Wonder why...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Kishkumen wrote:He never read the whole thing either. He tried, but he fell asleep in the "cribbing Isaiah" chapters. Just like I did when I was 8 years old.
It's interesting that almost all the cribbing comes in the books of Nephi, which replace the lost book of Lehi. It's almost as if he were trying to pad that part of the book because of his inability to reproduce the earlier draft.
