Chumps, I'll see ya around

[_jo1952]

CFR that the plates were buried while Jesus lived and died, or even while He was visiting the Nephites.

Love, jo

You should read Book of Mormon.
(There were a campaign - I think it was in 1995 under GBH, I may err - to read Book of Mormon in a year.)

Focus on preamble of the chapters, especially the timeline.

"About B.C./A.D., and the year."
Please do Your homework Yourself...

Love, ludwigm

HUH?

Hi MFB,

It appears to me that what has been ignored is that what we have recorded in the Book of Mormon for this time period, was taken by Mormon off of the original plates being kept by Nephi while Jesus was alive, and when He visited the Nephites. Therefore, it is an error to conclude that the plates which kept Jesus' record were buried during the time that He lived on the earth. Those who have come to this conclusion need to read 3 Nephi 5:9-16 for clarification.

by the way, Ludwigm, I do appreciate your response to direct me to the source. As I see it, however, in accordance with the above referenced passage, it is not a logical argument for Thews or anyone else to try to claim that the original plates were buried while Jesus lived. The records Nephi was keeping were being written by Nephi during the time the events were taking place. Mormon's recording of these events was taken from the plates which Nephi was keeping. It is Mormon's record which Joseph Smith translated; not Nephi's record.

Love,

jo

[_thews]

You are free to believe as you choose, but to imply Jesus Christ lived and died while the supposed golden plates were buried in the ground doesn't make sense to me. Does this premise sound logical?

Hi Thews,

Thank you for recognizing that I am free to believe as I choose. Likewise, I believe you and everyone are free to believe as they choose.

CFR that the plates were buried while Jesus lived and died, or even while He was visiting the Nephites.

CFR that the plates ever existed, or that there ever was a supposed Nephite. How can I possibly prove something supposedly existed when you can even prove the Nephite people ever existed. To your point, I can prove that the Book of Abraham papyrus was stuffed into the entrails of a mummy while Christ existed, which proves my point and negates yours. It makes no sense that Jesus Christ would walk the earth and fail to define the henothestic Godhead in the Book of Abraham, which contradicts both the Book of Mormon and the Bible's monotheistic base.

First of all, it is your belief that Joseph Smith used "occult" seer stones. Therefore, I believe you are in error to make your comment as though it was "Truth".

It is not an opinion. Here... let me show you how I can back up my argument with data (from a pro-Mormon source):

http://fairwiki.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones

∗ ∗ ∗
Joseph as the village seer

Brant Gardner clarifies the role that Joseph and his stone played within the community of Palmyra,

Young Joseph Smith was a member of a specialized sub-community with ties to these very old and very respected practices, though by the early 1800s they were respected only by a marginalized segment of society. He exhibited a talent parallel to others in similar communities. Even in Palmyra he was not unique. In D. Michael Quinn's words: "Until the Book of Mormon thrust young Smith into prominence, Palmyra's most notable seer was Sally Chase, who used a greenish-colored stone. William Stafford also had a seer stone, and Joshua Stafford had a 'peepstone which looked like white marble and had a hole through the center.'" [9] Richard Bushman adds Chauncy Hart, and an unnamed man in Susquehanna County, both of whom had stones with which they found lost objects. [10] [1]

During his tenure as a "village seer," Joseph acquired several seer stones. Joseph first used a neighbor's seer stone (probably that belonging to Palmyra seer Sally Chase, on the balance of historical evidence, though there are other possibilities) to discover the location of a brown, baby's foot-shaped stone. The vision of this stone likely occurred in about 1819–1820, and he obtained his first seer stone in about 1821–1822.[2]

Joseph then used this first stone to find a second stone (a white one). The second seer stone was reportedly found on the property of William Chase in 1822 as Chase described it:

In the year 1822, I was engaged in digging a well. I employed Alvin and Joseph Smith to assist me.... After digging about twenty feet below the surface of the earth, we discovered a singularly appearing stone, which excited my curiosity. I brought it to the top of the well, and as we were examining it, Joseph put it into his hat, and then his face into the top of his hat.... The next morning he came to me, and wished to obtain the stone, alleging that he could see in it; but I told him I did not wish to part with it on account of its being a curiosity, but I would lend it.[3]
Gardner continues,

Joseph Smith, long before golden plates complicated his position as a local seer, appears to have functioned just as Sally Chase did. Quinn reports that: "E. W. Vanderhoof [writing in 1905] remembered that his Dutch grandfather once paid Smith seventy-five cents to look into his 'whitish, glossy, and opaque' stone to locate a stolen mare. The grandfather soon 'recovered his beast, which Joe said was somewhere on the lake shore and [was] about to be run over to Canada.' Vanderhoof groused that 'anybody could have told him that, as it was invariably the way a horse thief would take to dispose of a stolen animal in those days.'"13 While Vanderhoof reported a positive result of the consultation, it is interesting that his statement includes a qualifier that has the same intent as those added by the Saunders' brothers. By the end of the century, one wouldn't want to actually credit a village seer when describing their activities. Nevertheless, it isn't the effectiveness that is important—it is the nature of the consultation. Sally Chase's clients consulted her to find things which were lost, and Joseph Smith had at least one client who did the same. [4]

http://fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Money_digging

Was not Joseph Smith a money digger?
Yes, but it was never a very profitable job for him, as he only got fourteen dollars a month for it.

—Joseph's tongue-in-cheek response to one of a list of questions that were asked of him during a visit at Elder Cahoon's home. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 120; History of the Church 3:29; Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 271)

I would use this same argument against anyone who claims that they can prove there is a God. It is really a belief - no one can prove God exists. Even Jesus could not convince the people who came to hear Him speak that He was the promised Messiah. In fact, I believe it was for this reason that Father does not hold us accountable for blasphemy against either Him or His Son. However, we ARE held accountable for blasphemy against the Holy Ghost once we have received a sure witness and understand that Jesus IS the Christ. The Holy Ghost's witness is much more powerful because He speaks to our spirit - not our physical body of flesh and bones. Indeed, the Holy Ghost's responsibility is to be the spiritual witness on the earth - so His witness Trump's seeing God Himself in person (at least until Christ returns).

If you would use the same argument, you would be incorrect in doing so. The point you're attempting to make is that Joseph Smith's seer stones are not occult objects, and I have proven that Joseph Smith, as a money digger, used his seer stones (the exact same seer stones used to translate the Book of Mormon) to contact/appease the evil treasure guardians to obtain gold. Care to acknowledge these facts?

Here's FairMormon's take on the trial of Joseph Smith for glass-looking: http://fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Lega ... king_trial

It is important to realize that every statement about "magic" or the "occult" by LDS authors is a negative one. Joseph and his contemporaries would likely have shocked and dismayed to be charged with practicing "magic." For them, such beliefs were simply how the world worked. Someone might make use of a compass without understanding the principles of magnetism. This mysterious, but apparently effective, device was useful even if its underlying mechanism was not understood. In a similar way, activities of the early 1800s or Biblical times which later generations would view skeptically were simply thought of as part of how the world worked.

This is an incorrect statement, as Joseph Smith believed in magic. Joseph Smith carried with him a Jupiter talisman, which is also an occult object.

http://www.fairwiki.org/Joseph_Smith/Oc ... r_talisman
While the distortion runs deep here, the facts are obvious to anyone who cases about the truth.

This piece came to me through the relationship of my father, Major L. C. Bidamon, who married the Prophet Joseph Smith's widow, Emma Smith. I certify that I have many times heard her say, when being interviewed, and showing the piece, that it was in the Prophet's pocket when he was martyred at Carthage, Ill.[5]

All of the stuff Bidamon sold did in fact belong to Joseph Smith. To use arguments from silence to claim what wasn't listed as being on his possession when he was killed is a typical apologetic ruse to pound the square peg into the round hole.

Further, we have no complete record of what Jesus taught while He was teaching His Apostles either in Jerusalem, or to the Nephites. I do not think it is logical or reasonable, therefore, to merely wave our arms and dismiss anything not precisely found in the New Testament OR in the Book of Mormon and claim to know what He did or did not teach just because we can't "find" it written in Canon.

What's missing in your logic is that you can't prove a Nephite ever existed, nor can you produce on single shred of evidence that any single story in the Book of Mormon is historically accurate. If you wish to prove me wrong, please post a link to the tangible evidence that proves the Book of Mormon is truth, based on that tangible evidence. We know that Joseph Smith claimed Zelph was found in America, so wouldn't logic dictate that something could be found of the great war that killed him?

The Book of Abraham is not alone in teaching that there are many gods. The Bible does a fine job of teaching this as well. I am certain you have heard these arguments before.

You are referring (I'm assuming) to God stating Jesus was his son, but it also states Jesus was God in man.
http://carm.org/jesus-two-natures

Jesus is the most important person who has ever lived since he is the savior, God in human flesh. He is not half God and half man. He is fully divine and fully man. In other words, Jesus has two distinct natures: divine and human. Jesus is the Word who was God and was with God and was made flesh, (John 1:1,14). This means that in the single person of Jesus is both a human and divine nature, God and man. The divine nature was not changed when the Word became flesh (John 1:1,14). Instead, the Word was joined with humanity (Col. 2:9). Jesus' divine nature was not altered. Also, Jesus is not merely a man who "had God within Him" nor is he a man who "manifested the God principle." He is God in flesh, second person of the Trinity. "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word," (Heb. 1:3). Jesus' two natures are not "mixed together," (Eutychianism) nor are they combined into a new God-man nature (Monophysitism). They are separate yet act as a unit in the one person of Jesus. This is called the Hypostatic Union.

What isn't mentioned that passage to Kolob goes through Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith was just a man and not a God, but claimed to be more accomplished than Jesus Christ:

I have more to boast of than any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such work as I (History of the Church, Vol.6, pp. 408-09).

To understand God as a concept requires an infinite thought process, but to make sense out of multiple Gods based on an incorrectly translated passage from the pagan book of the dead makes no sense at all, especially since it contradicts the Book of Mormon's monotheistic base.

Once again, this is what you believe and what you have chosen to believe about the Book of Abraham. It is my belief that Joseph did try to use the few pieces of papyrus scroll he had obtained to first try to teach himself how to read what was written on them. However, I do not believe that this is where he ultimately obtained the Book of Abraham. It is my belief that when Father felt Joseph was ready, that the Book of Abraham was written as pure inspiration from God. I do not think that the papyrus was "translated" like the Book of Mormon was. Likewise, I believe that the book of Moses was also received as pure inspiration from God.

The Book of Abraham is a "translation" of what Joseph Smith claims were written "by his hand" by Abraham. If you wish to appease your cognitive dissonance by rejecting the "translation" it's understandable for you to need to do so, but it defies logic and the historical record.

http://mormonthink.com/book-of-abraham-issues.htm

"... with W. W. Phelps and Oliver Cowdery as scribes, I commence the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc. - a more full account of which will appear in its place, as I proceed to examine or unfold them. Truly we can say, the Lord is beginning to reveal the abundance of peace and truth." (History of the Church, Vol. 2, p. 236).

"THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM

TRANSLATED FROM THE PAPYRUS, BY JOSEPH SMITH

A Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt. - The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus."

by the way, I ponder at your ability to accept as Christian some of the pagan beliefs which have been incorporated into Christianity, while you snub your nose at what you perceive others to be doing with what you consider to be pagan.

This is a typical apologetic response. Throw the Bible under the bus to explain away why Mormonism doesn't have to make sense.

I would like you to share, if you would, some of your thoughts about what paganism looks like to you. Now, I realize that many pagan groups evolved to the point where they were offering human sacrifices - far beyond the Jewish tradition of animal sacrifices. Yet, their tradition was that they did believe in a god or gods - they had built idols meant to represent them - though they did not really know who their god(s) were. It was this very condition which Paul used to help teach the Greek pagans about who their "god" was. His teaching to them was that their ideas about the existence of god was correct; his tactic was to explain WHO God was. You should know that I think all mythical beliefs about god(s) have their root in Truth which was first understood by their forefathers; but which, over the passage of time, became corrupted by man. This is the same pattern we see with the Pharisees; i.e., where Jesus teaches they had corrupted the Law so much that the Pharisees were teaching as doctrine the commandents of men.

To do this I would have to agree with your argument, which I don't. As you attempt to stray the question in order to validate why occult objects and the pagan doctrine Joseph Smith used is somehow Christian, it would be a waste of time, as you've incorrectly stated Joseph Smith's seer stones are not of the occult, nor is the pagan facsimile Joseph Smith used to "translate" the book of Abraham its source. If you would finish this argument before starting a new one I'd appreciate it.

To answer you first point, claiming you've heard the "same old mantra hundreds of times before" is missing a key element... was your understanding based on acknowledging the facts? If so, I'd very much appreciate your input to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42

I took the time to read the offerings of the posters who tried to talk me out of believing that Joseph Smith is a Prophet of God. What I have seen is this: Joseph's detractors use material readily available to them which they present which was originally provided by individuals for the express purpose of destroying Joseph's credibility, or they attempt to present written documentation and show it in a negative light and negative interpretation in order to provide it as evidence against Joseph. What they do not present as a foundation against which to determine their conclusions, is the same type of material for ANY Old Testament prophet. Therefore, how can they justify that their conclusions are accurate, when there is nothing comparable to use in determining the reliability or credibility of Old Testament prophets? This does not seem logical or reasonable to me. Without any precedent to base their accusations upon, I believe that such cases to try to prove that Joseph could not possibly be a Prophet of God would be thrown out of court. Also, without any precedent, the only way any case could be presented would be based solely on conjecture and personal interpretation of whatever "evidence" they might provide in support of their argument. In fact, no one can prove, or has physical evidence to prove, that the greatest Prophet of all time; i.e., Jesus Christ Himself, was who He claimed to be. What would make man think that he could, therefore, prove that ANY Prophet is not who they claim to be?

Your doublespeak to attempt to draw parallel lines is so convoluted it misses the point entirely. The point is, there never was an Urim and Thummim according to the Mormon historical record. If you need to run off on tangents I understand why, and it's because you simply can't acknowledge the facts. The offer is still open... I would greatly appreciate a response to this thread as I have already posted all of the supporting data: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42

If we had evidence to prove or disprove Christ, then no faith would be required. What then would be the purpose of our being here to participate in the Plan of Salvation?

Do you see your pattern here? Continuing to stray from the conversation to make a point you feel is valid doesn't acknowledge the crux of the argument. Do you have any reason to believe Joseph Smith's seer stones are not occult objects? Please support this with something other than opinion and acknowledge the data presented.

To answer your question, I'm a Christian because I believe Jesus Christ was God... they are one. I don't believe in hell, and like you I see this life as a learning experience and not as some test to prove you chose correctly. In other words, we all win, but what we win is the knowledge of good and evil, along with the value of absolute truth.

I would only add that I believe you can only learn Truth from the Holy Ghost. He is the one who will confirm Truth - be it a physical Truth or a spiritual Truth. OTOH, the physical world cannot confirm any Truth, either physical or spiritual. The physical world CAN provide observable actions and materials, but man can only theorize about them. Truth about the physical world still needs to come from the Holy Ghost. At least, that's how I see it.

You can only find the truth when you can acknowledge it. If you were to state you believed in the power of Joseph Smith's seer stones even though they are occult objects, or that you believe in Joseph Smith's translations of the papyrus acknowledging they are in fact wrong, would be intellectually honest and based on the truth. By avoiding making a stance to the questions asked, in my opinion you are avoiding the truth to appease your cognitive dissonance.

Attempting to juxtapose why one thing doesn't need to make sense, to make sense out of something else that also doesn't make sense, is a Mormon tactic used to explain why, what doesn't make sense, doesn't need to.

You are going to have to take my word on this. The reasoning and logic I use to respond to posters who are anti-LDS come from my own head, unless otherwise stated in my responses, along with applicable links. I suppose you could call that a Mormon tactic based on the fact that I AM Mormon. But please do not confuse this with your generalization of a what you identify as a "Mormon tactic".

But you just solidified my argument. You aren't answering the questions asked, nor backing up your claims with data... I did, and that's because I can.

Joseph Smith used his seer stones to contact the dead before the Book of Mormon, and these exact same same seer stones were used to translate the Book of Mormon. Deuteronomy clearly defines contact with the dead in the eyes of God as an abomination, so it doesn't make sense that God, assuming a Christian God, would use occult objects (used to contact the dead) to bring Christian doctrine.

I would like to point out something you have already pointed out to me;
I do not believe in the ride in a belly of a whale, the great flood, nor hell. Now you are picking something out of Deuteronomy which you want to use to support an argument. Also, I would ask that you then reconcile what you pointed out in Deuteronomy using your interpretation of it with the following information which is also provided in the Bible:

1) In the book of Samuel (1Sam 28:8), Saul visits a medium in order to contact Samuel, who has died. As an aside I think it is interesting to learn that even though he has died, Samuel is still able to prophesy. God is able to advance His purposes as a result of this by having Saul and his sons die the next day. This leaves the position of "King" available for David. We see that the medium still lives, even though it was the medium who actually contacted the dead.

2) At Christ's Transfiguration, both Moses and Elias (who had died long before this event) appeared before Peter, James and John.

3) When Christ Resurrected, many of the dead rose with Him and walked the earth and were seen by the living.

And again, you completely derail the point, which is that Joseph Smith used his seer stones to contact evil before the Book of Mormon, and attempted to draw parallel lines to negate the significance. I understand your need to do so, as acknowledging the facts, you place faith in occult objects.

When you use "anti-Mormon" to define my stance, it's the same vantage point in reverse. If you wish to view my beliefs as rooted with bad intent, then it's rather hypocritical to use your inverse posturing with "anti" as acceptable. Do you see my point?

Are your comments and questions to me "pro" Mormon? Or are they "anti" Mormon? Or are you trying to claim that you are presenting them from a neutral position concerning the LDS Church?

I'm stating the truth based on facts. You've been conditioned to reject this truth by labeling it "anti-Mormon" in order to reject this truth. If this weren't so, you could simply acknowledge Joseph Smith's seer stones are in fact occult objects.

To your point, I honestly enjoy actual conversation about the facts as a starting point, because they are facts to then segue into how these facts are interpreted. It's why I would love it if you offered your opinion to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42.

The Book of Mormon refers to seer stones and other objects used for the same purpose. The Urim and Thummim were commonly used in the Old Testament. My opinion is that the seer stones Joseph used to translate the plates were not the same seer stones he had used prior to receiving the plates. Nothing he did with any other stones has ever been presented by him or anyone else as having any type of spiritual significance, nor are any of the results of using them represented as being of God.

And once again you take off on a trail that supposedly acknowledges the question, without addressing it. There never was an Urim and Thummim in Mormon history, so attempting to pound the square peg into the round hole using the Bible is an exercise in futility. Please acknowledge the facts and respond to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42.

I agree with your sentiment regarding spirituality and identify with it. Where we differ (in my opinion) is what truth defines our beliefs. I do not believe in the ride in a belly of a whale, the great flood, nor hell, so I'm probably considered a "Jack" Christian to some, but I don't care. I believe what I do based on truth, and if one disagrees it doesn't bother me. If you "identify" with Mormonism, it contradicts Christianity in my opinion, which is why I find these conversations very interesting. Again, you seem like a very nice person and also very happy, but the element that isn't acknowledged is the truth when it comes to belief that Joseph Smith really was a prophet of God, because, based on the facts, it (Mormonism) contradicts what Jesus Christ was all about. I hope you take me up on my request for an answer to the thread I previously mentioned, and I also hope you stay as you are sincere which is rare in my opinion.

My life is very difficult; quite frankly the majority of my happiness comes solely through my relationship with God. My physical existence sucks; albeit I am amazed and so thankful that God has brought Franktalk into my life which brings me some relief and comfort to my physical Being, and great strength and support to my spiritual Being.

Obviously, I disagree with you that the LDS Church contradicts anything about Jesus Christ. Meh....I am just happy for you that you believe in Christ. Therein, I rejoice with you!!!

Love,

jo

I don't believe in occult objects (Joseph Smith's seer stones) used to bring forth supposed "Christian" doctrine. I don't believe in an incorrectly translated pagan document to bring more "Christian" doctrine. You believe in both on these things, but cannot admit it. You don't have to admit it to me, but I hope you admit it to yourself someday. If you care to acknowledge there was no Urim and Thummim, or explain to me the error of my data, please acknowledge here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42

[_Franktalk]

Hi Thews:

You sure have gone to a lot of trouble in your effort to prove your agenda has credibility and worth. Inasmuch as my belief first is in Father, then in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost, my beliefs then evolve to encompass God's Prophets and whatever inspired work they did in accordance with His desires and commands.

Rather than argue over Latter-Day Prophets, or even Old Testament Prophets with you, I would prefer to go directly to the source of all Holy Prophets; in fact, the source of all life. If you can prove to me that God exists, or that He does not exist, then I will take the time to answer your agenda-driven comments. At that point, we will be starting at basically the same level of human understanding. Otherwise, we will be wasting our time with one another. I am not big into wasting my time.

Love,

jo

Edited: We just moved; and, for some reason, even though Mormon Discussions recognized me as jo1952 when I signed in to respond to the email notification, my post has posted under franktalk's avatar. Please be aware that this is NOT franktalk's response - it is jo1952's response. If a moderator can straighten this out, it would be greatly appreciated. In fact, my computer will not be set up for the next couple of days....so rats.......

Thanks,

jo

[_thews]

Hi Thews:

You sure have gone to a lot of trouble in your effort to prove your agenda has credibility and worth. Inasmuch as my belief first is in Father, then in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost, my beliefs then evolve to encompass God's Prophets and whatever inspired work they did in accordance with His desires and commands.

Well Frank, as you've demonstrated here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21407&hilit=+Frank&start=63 you can't finish a conversation without running from the truth.

I will stop here.

Why did you choose to stop Frank? Did you reach a dead end again where the facts simply overwhelmed you? Your belief in Joseph Smith as a prophet of god is rooted in the same belief that occult seer stones provided you this faith. I'd love to hear what you think about the origin of the Urim and Thummim. If you would, and you believe you can explain it to me, please answer this thread and explain how the supposed Urim and Thummim are not Joseph Smith's occult seer stones... based on the Mormon historical record:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529&start=42

Rather than argue over Latter-Day Prophets, or even Old Testament Prophets with you, I would prefer to go directly to the source of all Holy Prophets; in fact, the source of all life. If you can prove to me that God exists, or that He does not exist, then I will take the time to answer your agenda-driven comments. At that point, we will be starting at basically the same level of human understanding. Otherwise, we will be wasting our time with one another. I am not big into wasting my time.

Love,

jo

Not sure why you quoted this. Jo, with her "Love" posting to her threads, is selectively telling people they will be ignored for asking the wrong questions. Here's an example as your attempted tag team in this thread is blatantly obvious:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=21415&start=168

If you are wondering why I would still participate in what may appear to be similar discussions according to your standards, it will be because I think the posters I will participate with are being sincere in the questions - and not doing so solely for the purpose of causing the faith of others to falter. If I should conclude that they are also not being sincere, I will cease my discussions with them as well. It's still a free country, if I am not mistaken.

Let the stoning begin.....

So Frank, the "source of" your Mormon doctrine is rooted in seer stones and the pagan book of the dead. This is a fact, and if you wish to prove me wrong, please respond here regarding the conflated use of Urim and Thummim which never existed in Mormon history: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21529

Please Frank, explain to me the error of my factual data. What happened to the Mormon Urim and Thummim, and when did Joseph Smith obtain them?

Edited: We just moved; and, for some reason, even though Mormon Discussions recognized me as jo1952 when I signed in to respond to the email notification, my post has posted under franktalk's avatar. Please be aware that this is NOT franktalk's response - it is jo1952's response. If a moderator can straighten this out, it would be greatly appreciated. In fact, my computer will not be set up for the next couple of days....so rats.......

Thanks,

jo

Thanks Frank. I look forward to your response regarding the origin of Joseph Smith's Urim and Thummim.