TBM's: Killer blow to the Book of Mormon?

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:51 am

First person that corrects the grammar of that last sentence, gets it.

;-)

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:53 am

Yes, but what about the now I see it, now I see it with my spiritual eyes as if in a vision testimonies? As for me and my house, I think some were part of the hoax and others bought into it spiritually...eyes or no eyes.

Martin Harris later tried to backpedal the "spiritual eyes" comment - but he was also trying to gain favor with utah LDS as well. But, overall, he was just nutty and unreliable. (or too mean to mention - or was that Joseph Smith' description of another witness? I can't remember which one he was attacking at the moment)

I think we see the same phenomenon today - the willingness on the part of some believers to embellish a bit to encourage faith in others. I'm reminded of this almost every time I watch EV healings on TV.

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:53 am

Jersey Girl wrote:First person that corrects the grammar of that last sentence, gets it.

;-)

I looked at it - there's simply no way to possibly correct it. It's irretrievably beyond correction.

Post by **_LCD2YOU** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:56 am

beastie wrote:
Wow! I'm lovin' this lively thread! Can I ask a stupid question? Why do some folks think the witnesses were telling the truth?
Mainly because they think God has told them so. The evidence they add for this is that they never denied their testimony of the Book of Mormon. They're certain that if the witnesses were involved in a hoax they would have spilled the beans.

Although I don't have a strong opinion on whether the witnesses were in on a hoax, OR if they were simply pulled along by a tide (they didn't write the statement themselves, If I recall correctly) - but I do believe that, as time went on, the stakes were too high to confess being involved in outright deception.

One of the apologist tactics when it comes to the veracity of the witnesses is this line:

"Do you think they would risk their lives and perjure themselves? If they were spreading falsehoods they would have been punished"

That leads me to mention con-men, grifters and deceivers. They exist and lie, right? So why is it so hard to for them to see that the witnesses could have been liars as well?

I had a hard time with that until I heard a TBM, a friend of mine in Provo, say, "Well if they weren't telling the truth, God would've had them killed!"

It seems in many TBMs' minds that the prophets are real as if they weren't, if they were con men leading the Church into apostacy, this God would kill them.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:01 am

LCD2YOU

I had a hard time with that until I heard a TBM, a friend of mine in Provo, say, "Well if they weren't telling the truth, God would've had them killed!"

Okay, I'll touch this with the ten foot pole. Maybe he did have them killed.

*ducks*

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:14 am

skippy the dead wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:First person that corrects the grammar of that last sentence, gets it.

;-)

I looked at it - there's simply no way to possibly correct it. It's irretrievably beyond correction.

Thanks, so what's the good news? :-)

Post by **_LCD2YOU** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:15 am

Jersey Girl wrote:LCD2YOU
I had a hard time with that until I heard a TBM, a friend of mine in Provo, say, "Well if they weren't telling the truth, God would've had them killed!"

Okay, I'll touch this with the ten foot pole. Maybe he did have them killed.

*ducks*

Well, I did point out Joseph Smith was killed.

She responded, "No, he was martyred".

Either way you want to look at it, it works for the elders of the church to support ideas like that.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:19 am

LCD2YOU wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:LCD2YOU
I had a hard time with that until I heard a TBM, a friend of mine in Provo, say, "Well if they weren't telling the truth, God would've had them killed!"

Okay, I'll touch this with the ten foot pole. Maybe he did have them killed.

*ducks*
Well, I did point out Joseph Smith was killed.

She responded, "No, he was martyred".

Either way you want to look at it, it works for the elders of the church to support ideas like that.

Martyred. That's entirely debatable.

Post by **_harmony** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:30 am

Jersey Girl wrote:
LCD2YOU wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:LCD2YOU
I had a hard time with that until I heard a TBM, a friend of mine in Provo, say, "Well if they weren't telling the truth, God would've had them killed!"

Okay, I'll touch this with the ten foot pole. Maybe he did have them killed.

*ducks*
Well, I did point out Joseph Smith was killed.

She responded, "No, he was martyred".

Either way you want to look at it, it works for the elders of the church to support ideas like that.

Martyred. That's entirely debatable.

Not to a TBM.

Post by **_truth dancer** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:52 pm

Edgar Cayce memorized a whole book....

Born in 1877, Edgar Cayce grew up in poverty with only an eighth grade education, but he would prove to have gifts beyond the ordinary and beyond this world. As a young boy, Cayce would converse with his dead grandfather and when he had reached his teens was able to memorize an entire book simply by placing it near his head when he slept

:-)

http://www.learnoutloud.com/Sale-Sectio ... phet/17081

~dancer~