Page 1 of 2
Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:22 pm
by _sock puppet
The defense of and COJCOLDS continued use these two pictures
despite there being no historical basis for them (but there are 5 or 6 eye witness accounts for the face-in-hat method) now command more vigorous, heels-dug-in defense than do the Facsimiles to the BoAbr.
So I am wondering, did I miss where these two pictures became LDS canon?
Why so highly sensitive, visceral defense of factually false depictions of a key event in early Mormon history?
Did South Park strike a death blow, a wooden stake to heart of Mormonism?
Do Mormons' testimony of the Book of Mormon and JSJr depend on these false pictures?
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:31 pm
by _Drifting
By bcspaces method of defining doctrine I think it may be fair to say that whilst not 'canon' in the strictest sense of the word, they are certainly the official doctrinal position on how the Book of Mormon came into being.
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 3:15 pm
by _DarkHelmet
At one point this picture was official, but I'm not sure if it is anymore. BC Space?
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:22 pm
by _sock puppet
DarkHelmet wrote:At one point this picture was official, but I'm not sure if it is anymore. BC Space?
That looks hokier than the face-in-hat method for which there are eye witness attestations.
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:27 pm
by _bcspace
By bcspaces method of defining doctrine I think it may be fair to say that whilst not 'canon' in the strictest sense of the word, they are certainly the official doctrinal position on how the Book of Mormon came into being.
Yes. The OP seems to be confusing canon and doctrine.
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:27 pm
by _brade
sock puppet wrote:DarkHelmet wrote:At one point this picture was official, but I'm not sure if it is anymore. BC Space?
That looks hokier than the face-in-hat method for which there are eye witness attestations.
I've said it before, but I think Nephites would be amazed at how we've figured out how to keep spectacles on our eyes without attaching them to giant metal breastplates.
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:31 pm
by _bcspace
I've said it before, but I think Nephites would be amazed at how we've figured out how to keep spectacles on our eyes without attaching them to giant metal breastplates.
Old Testament scholarship on the Urim and Thummim recognizes the use of the breastplate.
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:49 pm
by _Quasimodo
bcspace wrote:I've said it before, but I think Nephites would be amazed at how we've figured out how to keep spectacles on our eyes without attaching them to giant metal breastplates.
Old Testament scholarship on the Urim and Thummim recognizes the use of the breastplate.
bc, doesn't this alone make you question the whole Book of Mormon?
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:25 pm
by _bcspace
Old Testament scholarship on the Urim and Thummim recognizes the use of the breastplate.
bc, doesn't this alone make you question the whole Book of Mormon?
No, why should it?
Re: Are these Pix now LDS Canon?
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:30 pm
by _sock puppet
sock puppet wrote:DarkHelmet wrote:At one point this picture was official, but I'm not sure if it is anymore. BC Space?
That looks hokier than the face-in-hat method for which there are eye witness attestations.
brade wrote:I've said it before, but I think Nephites would be amazed at how we've figured out how to keep spectacles on our eyes without attaching them to giant metal breastplates.
Nephites obviously did not have ears, sort of like the current dispensation's FP/12.