Stake Pres coming to visit

[_Morley]

Stem, for what it's worth, perhaps you should consider a different analogy. You are comparing what the LDS Church would say is the keystone to the Restoration of All Things, something that will impact all of mankind for time and all eternity--to a hangnail.

edit: Never mind. Already said. Twice.

My analogy is merely to demonstrate that something is not a lie merely because it wasn't reported until later on. It had nothing to do with the significance of each event, although i do get the silliness in it as do you fine gents.

Okay, yes, I am going to beat this severely wounded horse, one more time.

If a friend came to me and said she forgot to tell me that she snagged her fingernail a few years ago, my reaction might be a little different than if she came to me and said that, she forgot to tell me, a couple of ago, two angels and one immortal man appeared to her and a friend, and bestowed upon them the most awesome power in the history of the world. And, oh, by the way, that was why she'd been doing some of the unusual things that she'd been doing.

In that case, I might be inclined think she was telling a lie, because in part, "it wasn't reported until later on."

[_Morley]

....
This guy sounds like a pretty cool friend Zee. ....

Agree.

[_zeezrom]

Stem,

Oliver, who was present, gave a conflicting testimony. There are other problems.

The church goes on merrily as if it is fact. They give a specific date and set of circumstances. They pulled it out of thin air.

[_stemelbow]

Okay, yes, I am going to beat this severely wounded horse, one more time.

If a friend came to me and said she forgot to tell me that she snagged her fingernail a few years ago, my reaction might be a little different than if she came to me and said that, she forgot to tell me, a couple of ago, two angels and one immortal man appeared to her and a friend, and bestowed upon them the most awesome power in the history of the world. And, oh, by the way, that was why she'd been doing some of the unusual things that she'd been doing.

In that case, I might be inclined think she was telling a lie, because in part, "it wasn't reported until later on."

Okay, but this is quite different than a friend coming to tell you something. I suppose you can think whatever you want, but that's not my point. I'm merely trying to issue a challenge to the claim that it must be a lie if it wasn't reported until later on.

[_stemelbow]

Stem,

Oliver, who was present, gave a conflicting testimony. There are other problems.

Of course there are problems. But, my comments aren't to suggest that since their are problems someone can think that the events didn't happen as claimed. I am contesting the idea that since there are problems that must mean it never happened as claimed. I disagree with this type of criticism vehemently, even though its by far the mostcommonly used tactic here. We might have to come up with a name for it, kinda how people have used the term mopologetics to refer to poorly constructed, in their eyes, defenses of the faith--or using questionable tactics to defend. This is much like that it seems to me.

The church goes on merrily as if it is fact. They give a specific date and set of circumstances. They pulled it out of thin air.

That's not true. It was clearly an effort to determine when the restoration of the M.P. took place, exactly. its not quite out of thin air. Its the best reconstruction as the church deems possible.

[_bcspace]

This is why I've recommended that the Church unilaterally remove some names from the records.

[_Morley]

Okay, but this is quite different than a friend coming to tell you something. I suppose you can think whatever you want, but that's not my point. I'm merely trying to issue a challenge to the claim that it must be a lie if it wasn't reported until later on.

I'm not saying it "that it must* be a lie if it wasn't reported until later on." I'm saying that probability of falsehood is increased. Wouldn't you agree, Stem?

*My italics.

[_Morley]

This is why I've recommended that the Church unilaterally remove some names from the records.

Please explain.

[_zeezrom]

Stem,

Oliver:

"I was present with Joseph when an holy angel from God came down from heaven and conferred on us, or restored, the lesser or Aaronic Priesthood, and said to us, at the same time, that it should remain upon the earth while the earth stands. I was also present with Joseph when the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred by the holy angel from on high. This Priesthood, we then conferred on each other by the will and commandment of God."

I guess Peter and James may have hidden themselves from Oliver. Is that what you are thinking? Joseph Smith talked to Oliver later on to inform him that there were actually 3 beings present not 1.

I'm totally and completely amazed that the most important event in LDS history was not recorded. What event is more important to LDS?

According to this church article http://LDS.org/ensign/1996/12/the-resto ... priesthood, the evidence showing the MP was restored May 1829 is the following:

"Well, if they didn't have it, how could they have started a church? Duh!"

that is the evidence used. Ridiculous.

Well, Hirum Page and BY confirmed PJ&J came and restored the priesthood but the problem is, they kinda weren't there.

Too bad the guys who happened to be present were more interested in documenting other things, like the time Joseph saved a woman and her baby from a runaway coach and the time he went sledding with his kids.

[_stemelbow]

I'm not saying it "that it must* be a lie if it wasn't reported until later on." I'm saying that probability of falsehood is increased. Wouldn't you agree, Stem?

*My italics.

Well sure. But that's really beside the point I'm going for.