DiscussMormonism.com

mentalgymnast wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:He didn’t and it’s not.

He didn't what? It's not what?

It's readily apparent, to me, that he did and it is.

Are you misdirecting?

If indeed there was a calculated purpose to leave the portion that I highlighted in blue in lower case while the surrounding text was in upper case, I think that should be made known. Re-purposing his cut and paste to apparently show/demonstrate that the lost ten tribes were to gather together in Zion in the state of Missouri changes the meaning of the text dramatically.

The way/method in which a selected portion of text that has been cut and pasted from source material is 'pasted' makes a difference. And I've already described why earlier.

There was an intentional misdirect in my opinion. It's not like this isn't done by folks, including magicians, in order to steer their audience in a certain direction of observation/perception.

Regards,
MG

I agree. There was. Someone doesn’t want folks to think about Smith’s false prophecies, so he picks a fight over emphasis to change the subject.

jfro18 wrote:The problem is that if you take Joseph's words at face value, they have been proven false in every way here... and since he claims it is under the authority of Jesus, it it revelation that failed which can't happen for a true prophet.

When I read this section:

And now I am prepared to say by the authority of Jesus Christ, that not many years shall pass away before the United States shall present such [p. 17] a scene of bloodshed as has not a parallel in the history of our nation pestilence hail famine and earthquake will sweep the wicked off this generation from off the face of this Land to open and prepare the way for the return of the lost tribes of Israel from the north country...

The first thing that struck me was that Joseph pin pointed and was quite specific in regards to the location of widespread destruction and bloodshed. The United States. Widespread destruction, bloodshed, and pestilence was exactly what happened/occurred as a result of the Civil War.

And without the eventual outcomes which came out of this ugly period in our history it is debatable as to what kind of country we would have and whether those from the 'lost tribes of Israel' would have ever immigrated into the United States. Look at where we are today with the United States being the 'melting pot' of people from all over the earth.

You say we ought to observe things at face value. I agree with you on that point.

Regards,
MG

Res Ipsa wrote:Someone doesn’t want folks to think about Smith’s false prophecies, so he picks a fight over emphasis to change the subject.

But the misdirect itself may have had the intended result of creating a false prophecy on Joseph's part.

Is that OK?

Regards,
MG

Res Ipsa wrote:Someone doesn’t want folks to think about Smith’s false prophecies, so he picks a fight over emphasis to change the subject.

Sounds like the tactics Hugh Nibley often made when trying to deflect from the obvious blunders of Facsimile No. 3. Deflect from the topic at hand and lead on with all kinds of red herrings.

BUT, we know that the Prophecies & Explanations of Joseph Smith are false.

mentalgymnast wrote:

jfro18 wrote:Instead of arguing over what color/font words are, just take them at face value because at the end of the day they're going to be wrong no matter what size, shade, color, or font they are presented in.

That's not true in this instance. Using the technique of misdirection grindael may have had the intent of showing that the lost ten tribes were on their way to Zion in the state of Missouri. Maybe that wasn't his intent, but then I would ask why the intentional change in font size so as to connect the large font at the front end with the large font at the back end? with small font in between to be glossed over.

Regards,
MG

I think the emphasis is to state that these natural disasters that will sweep the wicked off the earth will allow for the lost tribes to gather again... and where else would that gather but in Missouri?

So again, I get what you're saying that the emphasis might be forcing a point but at the same time it still doesn't change the overall idea.

And that never happened... and since Joseph foolishly put a timetable on it, he again showed himself to be a false prophet.

mentalgymnast wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:Someone doesn’t want folks to think about Smith’s false prophecies, so he picks a fight over emphasis to change the subject.

But the misdirect itself may have had the intended result of creating a false prophecy on Joseph's part.

Is that OK?

Regards,
MG

If that were the case it would not just be OK but warranted.

But again if you take the letter at face value without adding in words Joseph never said (such as warfare, civil war, etc), it is absolutely a failed prophecy. The civil war never caused pestilence, hail, famine, and earthquake unless you're really going to stretch infections from injuries? Pestilence is known as widespread disease like the plague. You could argue it caused famine in the areas of the war, but again that's a massive redirect from everything else.

It just doesn't add up.

This is the same person that saw Elias and Elijah in the temple as separate people even as they are the same person with different translations, inserted Deutero-Isaiah passages in the Book of Mormon written after Lehi left, and completely botched the Book of Abraham translation.

Why do we have to keep correcting a prophet's words to make them become even remotely feasible?

mentalgymnast wrote:Civil War.

The Civil War doesn't constitute hail and earthquakes. America has not been swept anywhere. The country is built upon the foundation of a network of massive cities.

Joseph Smith was trying to scare people.

jfro18 wrote:[Joseph] foolishly put a timetable on it, he again showed himself to be a false prophet.

...those now living upon the earth whose eyes shall not be closed in death until they see all these things which I have spoken fulfilled.

There were those living that were around to see the atrocities, bloodshed, and pestilences that occurred directly as a result of the Civil War and its aftermath.

And no, the lost ten tribes had not returned to Zion in the state of Missouri during that time.

Should we expect that to have been the case?

By reading grindael's cut and paste one might think so.

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:Someone doesn’t want folks to think about Smith’s false prophecies, so he picks a fight over emphasis to change the subject.

But the misdirect itself may have had the intended result of creating a false prophecy on Joseph's part.

Is that OK?

Regards,
MG

The prophecy is false regardless.

mentalgymnast wrote:There were those living that were around to see the atrocities, bloodshed, and pestilences that occurred directly as a result of the Civil War and its aftermath.

And no, the lost ten tribes had not returned to Zion in the state of Missouri during that time.

Should we expect that to have been the case?

By reading grindael's cut and paste one might think so.

Regards,
MG

That's a massive stretch. I live in the Midwest... so if I prophesy that there will be great unrest in the coming days, could I point to a weekend of mass shootings in Chicago and say "Look at the sorrow and bloodshed?"

Joseph Smith could've EASILY said warfare because wars are a part of history, yet he chose to go with the supernatural and that never happened.

The problem with magic is that no one in history has been able to get it right - they only tell people it happened to them and hope people believe it.

And, yes, I would expect the gathering in Missouri to have happened if we are to accept the Civil War is what Joseph meant. The entire point is to saw the wicked will be swept off and that would free up the gathering... it's been 150 years and the church still hasn't moved back to Missouri. Doesn't that tell you something?