Joseph Smith Megathread

[_harmony]

In my above example, the lay person "looked to the Geek" for knowledge.

Not a good idea. Follow the prophet, not the geek.

[_Simon Belmont]

You are missing the point, and badly. The comparison is not one of a teacher not covering all of the possible information in a given subject in a school year (such as your many mathematical examples suggest). It's a problem with the teaching, the curriculum.

No. I am afraid it is not. Sunday school appeals to a mass audience. It is a function of church on Sunday, and it is not a college course on history. Members are free to find out more about what was discussed by picking up a book, or attending an Institute class. For those not interested in learning more about such things, well, what can be said? I wonder who's responsibility it is to become educated.

It is more like Orwell's Ministry of Truth at work. It is like reading a communist Chinese account of the Tienanmen Square revolt. It is like ... I think I've made my point, even if you don't get it. Yeah, I get that the church doesn't prevent the information from being put "out there", but it also isn't Out There with it. It's all message control, and it seems to be working. Your whole blow-off of BY and blood atonement shows it's mechanisms are work.

Yeah, perhaps it is time for you to purchase or craft that tinfoil hat now. Your conspiracy theories are becoming a little too phantasmagorical.

But honestly, you are right about adults and the access that we have to information now. I think, frankly, that I represent your point as it really is - a former LDS who, being fortunately primed to be in a state of mind that allowed me to question the assumptions of my youth and upbringing, found access to more information and made the choices necessary to get out of the dark.

You plummeted yourself into greater darkness, I'm afraid. Have you read anything non-critical?

You are creating a strawman again and again with this point. It isn't about pursuing and gaining access to inform one's self. It's about the church controlling the message by limiting what is actually taught. You are free to read what you like as long as it doesn't actually change your way of thinking. If that sounds reasonable to you, I suggest you are not as successful in learning as you suppose.

Yes, Jeff Rense, it is about everyone else controlling everything around you. It is all one big conspiracy.

But guess what? You are responsible for learning what you have interest in learning. It is not anyone else's responsibility. The Church limits what is taught at Church, on Sunday to worship-centered lessons. That is what Church is for. It is not a college history class. If you want to know more about what was discussed in Sunday school, find out for yourself as I did, and as many people I know did, and as all the scholars on MST did.

By the way, I would like to participate in your many threads which are dedicated to me, but I have limited time.

[_Simon Belmont]

In my above example, the lay person "looked to the Geek" for knowledge.

Not a good idea. Follow the prophet, not the geek.

ZING!

[_Jersey Girl]

delete---nevermind banging head/brick wall

[_Kishkumen]

Don't have time for a full answer. This will have to suffice for now.

They should "look to the Geeks."

I'm not sure they should. I think the geeks of the LDS Church have a particularly poor track record. They tend to be liberal activists or Mopologists. There is maybe a handful of levelheaded people whom I believe are suitable for the task.

Actually, I think the majority of it is pornography.

Not the present topic.

But all churches are guilty of this.

As I have tried to explain, the LDS Church isn't any other church. It has a unique history. It stands out. Its challenges and needs aren't the same as others. To say "all churches are guilty of this" is to fall into an unproductive defensive paradigm, not a problem-solving one.

[_Simon Belmont]

Resurrecting -- I have high hopes for this thread.

[_Simon Belmont]

Don't have time for a full answer. This will have to suffice for now.

They should "look to the Geeks."

I'm not sure they should. I think the geeks of the LDS Church have a particularly poor track record. They tend to be liberal activists or Mopologists. There is maybe a handful of levelheaded people whom I believe are suitable for the task.

I believe you are generalizing. The "geeks" are those who hold an above-average level of interest in Mormonism and seek out the "deeper" doctrines, but not only the critical doctrines, the apologetic viewpoint as well. Many of them have spend their entire lives in study of Mormonism -- they live consecrated lives. These are the geeks which they should look to, and that is why I believe apologetics are important.

But all churches are guilty of this.

As I have tried to explain, the LDS Church isn't any other church. It has a unique history. It stands out. Its challenges and needs aren't the same as others. To say "all churches are guilty of this" is to fall into an unproductive defensive paradigm, not a problem-solving one.

[/quote]

Every church is unique in its own right, with its own unique history and challenges.

[_thews]

If Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, the why did he translate a known hoax when he said this, "I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth."

(insert response to data presented here).



http://mormonthink.com/kinderhookweb.htm

From 'History of the Church' by Joseph Smith pages vol. 5, pages. 372-379

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

[_harmony]

thews! Where've you been? We missed you.

[_thews]

If Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, the why did he translate a known hoax when he said this, "I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth."

(insert response to data presented here).



http://mormonthink.com/kinderhookweb.htm

From 'History of the Church' by Joseph Smith pages vol. 5, pages. 372-379

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15184&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Stay tuned, Darth J, and watch what happens when someone attempts a substantive thread.

posting.php?mode=quote&f=1&p=381474

You guys are so hell bent on Mormonism being wrong that you'll stoop to any depths to protect that belief. When PP says "I know, based on knowledge that it was made up" what does that tell you?

Kindly, briefly, explain the evidence and what it means to you.

You have no more truth than I or anyone else have. It is perpetually elusive. It is unknowable.

Remember, PP believes he knows, based on knowledge.

LOL!

I would contend that PP has knowledge and addresses the questions asked, while Simon Belmont’s tired ruse is to imply he has knowledge, but runs away with tail tucked from the Joseph Smith dead ends he simply cannot answer… like the above. Please Simon, as you continue to demand acknowledgement to your questions, by what divine intervention did Joseph Smith use to come up with the translation of the Kinderhook plates which revealed to Joe Smith the story of Ham?
(note actual data referenced above).