Posting 95 LDS Theses on the Church Doors

[_Tobin]

I'm still laughing about your dismissal of what Joseph Smith said in the History of Church that showed how very wrong you are about the U&T.

I'm not wrong at all and posted numerous data points to make my argument (which you ignored and failed to respond to), but it doesn't surprise me how easily you discount numerous facts in order to grasp onto one entry in church history (written by an unknown author after Joseph Smith died) to make your supposed point. In other words, you "LOL" a lot at your own ignorance. Anytime, anywhere Tobin... you're my favorite kind of apologist. Much like Simon Belmont when he came in here with guns blazing, in time you'll tire of winding up on the bottom of the shoe. You'll selective place people on ignore, then, after you spiral into a flaming ball, will make a post to proclaim you're leaving. You'll come back, maybe 10 times like Droopy did, or take the Simon Belmont route and fade to black. I may be wrong, but I don't think so. Once you acknowledge you may have been mistaken about what God supposedly told you, you'll delve into the facts to come to a logical conclusion... I hope, for your sake, this happens sooner rather than later.

You have nothing to support your arguments, which is why you try so hard to avoid answering questions, but what you do have is some limited knowledge. The fact that you at least acknowledge Joseph Smith couldn't translate Egyptian is an indicator, as it's the first step in understanding the wall of your cognitive dissonance that protects you. The more you attempt to use facts, the more you'll realize the facts don't support your argument. It may happen in a year or 20 years from now, but eventually you'll have to digest what you've learned in attempting to defend your hero in Joseph Smith.

The problem with your comment thews is that this part of the History of the Church was published in the Times and Seasons on May 16, 1842 while Joseph Smith was alive and was the editor of the newspaper.
http://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v3n14.htm
Joseph Smith, "History of Joseph Smith," Times and Seasons 3 no. 14 (16 May 1842), 785–786

Notwithstanding however the great restrictions which he had been laid under, and the solemnity of the covenant which he had made with me, he did shew them to others, and by stratagem they got them away from him, and they never have been recovered nor obtained back again unto this day. In the mean time while Martin Harris was gone with the writings, I went to visit my father’s family, at Manchester. I continued there for a short season and then returned to my place in Pennsylvania. Immediately after my return home I was walking out a little distance when behold the former heavenly messenger appeared and handed to me the Urim and Thummim again, (for it had been taken from me in consequence of my having wearied the Lord in asking for the privilege of letting Martin Harris take the writings which he lost by transgression,) and I enquired of the Lord through them and obtained the following revelation

You've got a serious problem now thews and I can't wait to see the excuses pile up as you try to squirm out of it. As bcspace said in another thread, that is game, set and match.

[_ludwigm]

It has to do with the fact that one of the two parties is ldsfaqs.

... and this character string is suspectable - by default.


See http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/:

About LDS FAQ and BYU Studies
BYU Studies sponsors LDS FAQ. BYU Studies is an academic LDS journal that has produced high quality, peer-reviewed, scholary LDS research since 1959.

Please take a short trip with me - there:

Start Searching
Use our search engine to find terms used in answers and questions.

Search "polygamy":

your search of 'polygamy' was found in the following:
Questions
When and why did the Church once practice polygamy?
Answers to these Questions
What is the history of the Church in Canada?
How prevalent are anti-Mormon publications?
What does the journal of Joseph Fielding say about the Nauvoo era?
Who are the "Mormon Fundamentalists"?
How was Mormonism depicted in French literature?
What significant events in Church history occurred during the early twentieth century (1898–1945)?
What significant events occurred in the early Utah period (1847–77)?
What kind of government did Utah Territory (1850–96) have?
When and why did the Church once practice polygamy?
How did Mark Twain treat religious or sacred literature, like the Book of Mormon?
What was the Manifesto of 1890?
Why was Utah denied statehood, and how did it eventually receive statehood?
How did nineteenth-century humorists portray the Mormons in literature?
What significant events in Church history occurred during the late nineteenth century (1878–98)?

By this search, You can not find:

Topic(s): Brigham Young
Who was Brigham Young?
...
He was also taught the principle of plural marriage, which he accepted after much reluctance and considerable thought and prayer.
...

How many wives did have he - without that much reluctance? 700? 1000?

1. But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites;
3. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines

By this search, You can not find:

Topic(s): History of the Church: Late Nineteenth Century, 1878–98
Who are the "Mormon Fundamentalists"?
"Mormon Fundamentalism" denotes the beliefs and practices of contemporary schismatic groups that claim to follow the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The Fundamentalist movement began after the issuance of the Manifesto of 1890, which publicly declared an official end to plural marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Fundamentalists held that God requires all "true" believers to abide by the principle of polygamy, irrespective of Church mandate. Fundamentalists claim to believe in the early history of the Church and the prophets up to and including John Taylor.

Got it? Fundamentalists ... believe in ... the prophets up to and including John Taylor.

[_BartBurk]

What do you all think of this modern-day LDS Martin Luther?

http://mormonreformation.blogspot.com/

That's a waste of time and effort when the Internet is available.

[_consiglieri]

It has to do with the fact that one of the two parties is ldsfaqs.

... and this character string is suspectable - by default.


See http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/:

About LDS FAQ and BYU Studies
BYU Studies sponsors LDS FAQ. BYU Studies is an academic LDS journal that has produced high quality, peer-reviewed, scholary LDS research since 1959.

Please take a short trip with me - there:

Start Searching
Use our search engine to find terms used in answers and questions.

Search "polygamy":

your search of 'polygamy' was found in the following:
Questions
When and why did the Church once practice polygamy?
Answers to these Questions
What is the history of the Church in Canada?
How prevalent are anti-Mormon publications?
What does the journal of Joseph Fielding say about the Nauvoo era?
Who are the "Mormon Fundamentalists"?
How was Mormonism depicted in French literature?
What significant events in Church history occurred during the early twentieth century (1898–1945)?
What significant events occurred in the early Utah period (1847–77)?
What kind of government did Utah Territory (1850–96) have?
When and why did the Church once practice polygamy?
How did Mark Twain treat religious or sacred literature, like the Book of Mormon?
What was the Manifesto of 1890?
Why was Utah denied statehood, and how did it eventually receive statehood?
How did nineteenth-century humorists portray the Mormons in literature?
What significant events in Church history occurred during the late nineteenth century (1878–98)?

By this search, You can not find:

Topic(s): Brigham Young
Who was Brigham Young?
...
He was also taught the principle of plural marriage, which he accepted after much reluctance and considerable thought and prayer.
...

How many wives did have he - without that much reluctance? 700? 1000?

1. But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites;
3. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines

By this search, You can not find:

Topic(s): History of the Church: Late Nineteenth Century, 1878–98
Who are the "Mormon Fundamentalists"?
"Mormon Fundamentalism" denotes the beliefs and practices of contemporary schismatic groups that claim to follow the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The Fundamentalist movement began after the issuance of the Manifesto of 1890, which publicly declared an official end to plural marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Fundamentalists held that God requires all "true" believers to abide by the principle of polygamy, irrespective of Church mandate. Fundamentalists claim to believe in the early history of the Church and the prophets up to and including John Taylor.

Got it? Fundamentalists ... believe in ... the prophets up to and including John Taylor.

Hi, Ludwigm,

Is it possible my sardonic wit was lost on you?


All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_ludwigm]

Is it possible ...

No.

In my examples I stressed just the same viewpoint as your one.
At least I tried...

[_consiglieri]

The misunderstanding was on my part, then.

Carry on.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_thews]

The problem with your comment thews is that this part of the History of the Church was published in the Times and Seasons on May 16, 1842 while Joseph Smith was alive and was the editor of the newspaper.
http://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v3n14.htm
Joseph Smith, "History of Joseph Smith," Times and Seasons 3 no. 14 (16 May 1842), 785–786

There's no date attached to your link Tobin. Since you don't seem to grasp the complexity of multiple data points, I assume the stock you place in a story told 12 years after the Book of Mormon was published is somehow credible.

In the mean time while Martin Harris was gone with the writings, I went to visit my father's family, at Manchester. I continued there for a short season and then returned to my place in Pennsylvania. Immediately after my return home I was walking out a little distance when behold the former heavenly messenger appeared and handed to me the Urim and Thummim again, (for it had been taken from me in consequence of my having wearied the Lord in asking for the privilege of letting Martin Harris take the writings which he lost by transgression,) and I enquired [inquired] of the Lord through them and obtained the following revelation:
Revelation to Joseph Smith, Jr. given July, 1828, concerning certain manuscripts on the first part of the Book of Mormon, which had been taken from the possession of Martin Harris.

Are you so well versed in Mormon history that FairMormon is wrong and you are, somehow, correct?

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones

Did Joseph lose the seer stone(s) and/or the Urim and Thummim?

Following the loss of the 116 pages, the Lord told Joseph:

1 NOW, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them.
2 And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened.
3 Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun.
4 Do not run faster or labor more than you have strength and means provided to enable you to translate; but be diligent unto the end. (DC 10:1-4)

Thus, "it" (Joseph's gift) was restored to him, but there is no indication that the Nephite interpreters (Urim and Thummim) were also returned, Joseph having also lost "them." That is, after repenting, Joseph would recover his seer stones, but apparently not the Urim and Thummim. Some Church sources have seen this as the point at which Joseph received the seer stone for the first time, but this is likely incorrect:

As a chastisement for this carelessness [loss of the 116 pages], the Urim and Thummim was taken from Smith. But by humbling himself, he again found favor with the Lord and was presented a strange oval-shaped, chocolate colored stone, about the size of an egg, but more flat which it was promised should answer the same purpose. With this stone all the present book was translated.[24]

This source is clearly somewhat confused, since it sees Joseph as getting his dark stone after the 116 pages, when it likely dates to 1822 at the latest (see above).

David Whitmer, who only came in contact with the translation after the loss of the 116 pages, indicated through a friend that

With the sanction of David Whitmer, and by his authority, I now state that he does not say that Joseph Smith ever translated in his presence by aid of Urim and Thummim; but by means of one dark colored, opaque stone, called a 'Seer Stone,' which was placed in the crown of a hat, into which Joseph put his face, so as to exclude the external light. Then, a spiritual light would shine forth, and parchment would appear before Joseph, upon which was a line of characters from the plates, and under it, the translation in English; at least, so Joseph said.[25]

Joseph also used the seer stone to keep himself and the plates safe, as his mother recorded:

That of which I spoke, which Joseph termed a key, was indeed, nothing more nor less than the Urim and Thummim, and it was by this that the angel showed him many things which he saw in vision; by which also he could ascertain, at any time, the approach of danger, either to himself or the Record, and on account of which he always kept the Urim and Thummim about his person.[26]

We see here the tendency to use the term "Urim and Thummim" to refer to Joseph's seer stone (or to the Nephite interpreters, which would have been too large for Joseph to carry on his person undetected). This lack of precision in terminology has, on occasion, confused some members who have not understood that either or both may be referred to by early LDS authors as "Urim and Thummim." To Joseph and his contemporaries, they were all the same type of thing, and merely differed in the strength of their power and ability. Clearly, devices from the Lord when directed by an angelic messenger (such as the Nephite interpreters) would outrank a seer stone found on one's own.

In a nutshell Tobin... you are categorically wrong. Emma Smith said it best...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Smith

"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."

You've got a serious problem now thews and I can't wait to see the excuses pile up as you try to squirm out of it. As bcspace said in another thread, that is game, set and match.

Game, set and match as long as you're a combination of a one-trick pony and a parrot. Keep spewing the same parrot-speak Tobin, but you again fail to address the multiple data points to include the first use of "Urim and Thummim" wasn't used until three years after the Book of Mormon was published. Tobin wanna cracker?

[_Tobin]

The problem with your comment thews is that this part of the History of the Church was published in the Times and Seasons on May 16, 1842 while Joseph Smith was alive and was the editor of the newspaper.
http://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v3n14.htm
Joseph Smith, "History of Joseph Smith," Times and Seasons 3 no. 14 (16 May 1842), 785–786

There's no date attached to your link Tobin. Since you don't seem to grasp the complexity of multiple data points, I assume the stock you place in a story told 12 years after the Book of Mormon was published is somehow credible.

I see. So your new theory is I made up the website OR I made up the facts about the Times and Seasons and dates listed on that website when the material was published (stated right at the top of the page by the way) OR you are falling back into that silly theory that we can't believe what Joseph Smith said later about the events he witnessed. You really do live in an alternate reality buddy.

Are you so well versed in Mormon history that FairMormon is wrong and you are, somehow, correct?<snip>

In this case, FAIR has incomplete information (like you) and their conclusions are wrong because of that (like you).

Now - as I've already pointed out, you are simply resorting to non-sense excuses and theories or if that doesn't work, you are ignoring the evidence that you are wrong. I think I've demonstated that quite adequately here. There is nothing more to say about the matter.

[_thews]

I see. So your new theory is I made up the website and facts about the Times and Seasons. You really do live in an alternate reality buddy.

You're back to your usualy ways of ignoring all the data posted and parroting the same tired tripe. Is your claim that something written down with no reference 12 years after the fact, somehow outweighs multiple data points that contradict it? I guess for you to show an ounce of critical thinking ability you'd have to acknowledge it, wouldn't you? You're nothing but a one-trick parrot. Bask in your ignorance Tobin... you are categorically wrong.

Are you so well versed in Mormon history that FairMormon is wrong and you are, somehow, correct?<snip>

In this case, FAIR has incomplete information (like you) and their conclusions are wrong because of that (like you).

So, for me to agree with you, I'd have to assume your take on this outweighs Brant Gardner's? Sorry Tobin, the folks at FairMormon know a hellofa lot more than you do, especially when you continue to fail to acknowledge the data that proves you wrong.

Now - as I've already pointed out, you are simply resorting to non-sense excuses and theories or if that doesn't work, you are ignoring the evidence that you are wrong. I think I've demonstated that quite adequately here. There is nothing more to say about the matter.

The only one you've "demonstrated" anything to is yourself. As you claim to have "won" this discussion, what you just can't seem to grasp is that you haven't acknowledged the data that proves you wrong. It's why you can't answer the question regarding whether or not Joseph Smith claimed to be able to translate Egyptian. I heard your argument, but you've said nothing of what Emma said, or the facts presented at FairMormon. Just keep avoiding the questions Tobin. If you had any credibility, you'd be rational in discussing (acknowledging) the data points that disagree with what God supposedly told you.

[_Tobin]

thews,

I have given you a good factual reference. Your response is to attack the reference and ignore it because it demonstrates you are wrong. That is all that is going on here. Your behavior here is simply demonstrating a case of pure intellectual dishonesty. There is nothing more I need to point out.