LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

[_Neo]

What text? There was no text in the hat. The text was the plates, and they weren't in the hat either.

There was most likely text in the hat, just as, if you click on the link below, there will be text on this screen:

http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/arabicscript/1/1.htm

Lets try looking at facts, not what was "most likely".
The facts are that the witnesses described the translation process that does not include the golden plates.

You are being deceitful if you say that there is no conflict.
Either the golden plates were used or they were not.
The churches pamphlets and some artwork depict the use of the golden plates.
DP says that the golden plates were used.
Witnesses say they were not even present.

Are you saying the witnesses are not trustworthy?

[_harmony]

What text? There was no text in the hat. The text was the plates, and they weren't in the hat either.

There was most likely text in the hat, just as, if you click on the link below, there will be text on this screen:

http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/arabicscript/1/1.htm

Text, as in Book. Text, as in plates. Not text, as in words.

Sorry I wasn't clear.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Lets try looking at facts, not what was "most likely".

I was simply giving an illustration of how the text of a book might be present in a device (a computer screen or, presumably, a seerstone or a crystal stone set in a bow) while the book is at a distance.

The facts are that the witnesses described the translation process that does not include the golden plates.

Which is of precisely no relevance if the text of the plates -- either the original text or the translation text -- appeared in the seerstone or the Urim and Thummim. Which is precisely what Joseph Smith reported.

You are being deceitful if you say that there is no conflict.

That's very gracious of you.

LOL. Honest disagreement with Neo is inconceivable. When Neo speaks, the thinking has been done.

Either the golden plates were used or they were not.

The text of a book can be present in a viewing device while the book is at a distance.

The churches pamphlets and some artwork depict the use of the golden plates.

If you've been accustomed to learn history from illustrations and "artists' conceptions," it's high time that you knew better.

DP says that the golden plates were used.

I've explained how I believe that they were used.

Witnesses say they were not even present.

I'm entirely aware of that. I've spoken on the subject and published on the subject.

Are you saying the witnesses are not trustworthy?

Not even slightly. I agree with them completely.

You're struggling really hard here.

[_collegeterrace]

Are you saying the witnesses are not trustworthy?

Not even slightly. I agree with them completely.

Why did he not show the plates to Emma's father Isaac Hale? If they were as real as you seem to believe the witnesses claim, then would they not have been as real to Isaac to physically see and feel?

Or was he in the wrong frame of mind?

[_Neo]

The facts are that the witnesses described the translation process that does not include the golden plates.

Which is of precisely no relevance if the text of the plates -- either the original text or the translation text -- appeared in the seerstone or the Urim and Thummim. Which is precisely what Joseph Smith reported.

Are you saying then that the "golden plates" were really NOT used?

Either the golden plates were used or they were not.

The text of a book can be present in a viewing device while the book is at a distance.

Are you saying then that the plates were present but the witnesses just did not see them?

You're struggling really hard here.

LOL. You are hilarious.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Are you saying then that the "golden plates" were really NOT used?

I'm saying precisely what I said.

Are you saying then that the plates were present but the witnesses just did not see them?

There were real plates, but the witnesses typically didn't see them.

You yourself said -- have you forgotten? -- that the witnesses didn't see them.

You're struggling really hard here.

I'm just getting bored.

[_Neo]

Are you saying then that the "golden plates" were really NOT used?

I'm saying precisely what I said.

Thanks for clearing this up.

Are you saying then that the plates were present but the witnesses just did not see them?

There were real plates, but the witnesses typically didn't see them.
You yourself said -- have you forgotten? -- that the witnesses didn't see them.
You're struggling really hard here.
I'm just getting bored.

No, I have not forgotten what I have said.
I was simply asking you a direct question, as you seem to have forgotten what the witnesses said.

You're struggling really hard here.

You yourself said this already -- have you forgotten?

I'm just getting bored.

If you are so bored with Mormon apologetics, perhaps you choose the wrong career path.

[_Daniel Peterson]

You're not Mormon apologetics, and Mormon apologetics isn't my career.

[_collegeterrace]

....Mormon apologetics isn't my career.

While it is not the title engraved below your name on the placard which sits on your BYU desk, it very evident it is how you spend the majority of your day, evening, and night.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

....Mormon apologetics isn't my career.

While it is not the title engraved below your name on the placard which sits on your BYU desk, it very evident it is how you spend the majority of your day, evening, and night.

Well, I suppose I could say at least DCP could be accused of being paid for his apologetics. Something that can't even be intimated in your case, despite all the time you waste on it, aye?