Book of Mormon geography

[_Shulem]

I could care less if Brant ever comes back. He thinks he's such an expert on Joseph Smith's miracle to translate. But he's no expert on the miracle of Facsimile No. 3 and can't even tender a comment.

Give me a break. I hope the door hit him on the way out. He makes me sick.

And the rest of you asskissers make me sick too.

So there.



Paul O

[_Yahoo Bot]

I could care less if Brant ever comes back. He thinks he's such an expert on Joseph Smith's miracle to translate. But he's no expert on the miracle of Facsimile No. 3 and can't even tender a comment.

Give me a break. I hope the door hit him on the way out. He makes me sick.

And the rest of you asskissers make me sick too.

So there.



Paul O

I think it is "I couldn't care less."

[_Themis]

As non believers, the only intelligent secular historical discussion we can have with believers that pertains to the translation process is to discuss how Smith PURPORTED to translate the Book of Mormon. Discussing how he "actually" translated the book is akin to discussing whether Batman or Spiderman would win a bar fight.

I would agree that discussing translation methods is like angels dancing on the head of a pin;

I think he is saying that there was no translating going on, which is obvious.

Joseph Smith refused, when asked, to explain his translation method.

I am not sure he refused to say anything, but it fits with someone making it up.

Plus I don't get it how David Whitmer would have ever witnessed the translation method.

You mean putting his head in the hat or seeing Joseph with his head in the hat?

Mormon scholars often debate the translation methods as ways to explain away the apparent "issues" of the Book of Mormon, much like they debate the LGT as a way to explain away the absence of on-the-ground proof in New York.

This is what you have to do when you don't want to accept the obvious.

[_Quasimodo]

I could care less if Brant ever comes back. He thinks he's such an expert on Joseph Smith's miracle to translate. But he's no expert on the miracle of Facsimile No. 3 and can't even tender a comment.

Give me a break. I hope the door hit him on the way out. He makes me sick.

And the rest of you asskissers make me sick too.

So there.



Paul O

Your facsimile 3 argument is the best I've seen to refute the Book of Mormon. It's what first put me off Joseph Smith as a teenager.

Who would you make that argument to if TBM's like Brant weren't here to bounce it off?

I don't think I'm being an asskisser in understanding the value of opponents in a good confrontation.

I know there are boards out there that consist of a group of people who all pretty much agree on everything. I've been to them. Really boring.

Now, you kiss my ass.

[_Themis]

He thinks he's such an expert on Joseph Smith's miracle to translate. But he's no expert on the miracle of Facsimile No. 3 and can't even tender a comment.

Brant is smart enough to know the Book of Abraham is a lost cause. Gee can't get put of it since he is expected to, although he seems to not say much over the years. I think he may just want it all to go away. Other then that you just have a few hacks like Will who hope to make name defending the church.

[_Shulem]

Your facsimile 3 argument is the best I've seen to refute the Book of Mormon. It's what first put me off Joseph Smith as a teenager.

Who would you make that argument to if TBM's like Brant weren't here to bounce it off?

I don't think I'm being an asskisser in understanding the value of opponents in a good confrontation.

I know there are boards out there that consist of a group of people who all pretty much agree on everything. I've been to them. Really boring.

Now, you kiss my ass.

All of your points are valid. Please excuse me for not kissing your ass. There is, however, another ass down the hall here on the fifth floor I want to kiss. I'd sell my soul for it.

Paul O

[_Shulem]

Brant is smart enough to know the Book of Abraham is a lost cause. Gee can't get put of it since he is expected to, although he seems to not say much over the years. I think he may just want it all to go away. Other then that you just have a few hacks like Will who hope to make name defending the church.

I think we can agree that the Book of Abraham is a sore spot for every LDS apologist and that Facismile No. 3 is a bag of nails to drive in their coffins.

I'd love to debate John Gee over Facsimile No. 3. I'd kick his ass all over the place and make him look like a fool. His scholarly tricks wouldn't work. I'd cut right through it and watch him bleed. I'd expose his apologetic nakedness and ravish him.

Paul O

[_Tobin]

I can understand why Brant has proposed this loose translation theory, but I don't see it as being very helpful in studying the Book of Mormon. If the Book of Mormon is so loosely translated to get concrete concepts like horse wrong, but word for word can bring Isaiah over - I think there is something wrong with the theory.

Brant is smart to avoid the Book of Abraham thing altogether. Anyone that wanders into that field of landmines is just asking to get blown up. At some point they'll have to admit the truth and realize the Book of Abraham has nothing to do with the papyrus as I do. The papyrus was the impetus for Joseph Smith to go to the Lord and receive the origin story that is the Book of Abraham. But this shouldn't come as a shock to Brant and other apologists and I'm surprised they haven't realized this already. Joseph Smith simply possessed NO ability to translate what-so-ever (whether it was the gold plates of the Book of Mormon or the papyrus). If he were able to tell us anything about them, it had to come from God and so it should come as no surprise he had no concept of what the papyrus really were.

[_Quasimodo]

All of your points are valid. Please excuse me for not kissing your ass. There is, however, another ass down the hall here on the fifth floor I want to kiss. I'd sell my soul for it.

Paul O

Are you sure?



If you change your mind there is a very tender pimple on my left cheek. Please try to avoid it.

Good luck with the guy down the hall! You never know.

[_Jaybear]

I would agree that discussing translation methods is like angels dancing on the head of a pin; Joseph Smith refused, when asked, to explain his translation method. To me its like debating the LGT v HGT. Plus I don't get it how David Whitmer would have ever witnessed the translation method.

Mormon scholars often debate the translation methods as ways to explain away the apparent "issues" of the Book of Mormon, much like they debate the LGT as a way to explain away the absence of on-the-ground proof in New York.

So, to that extent, I often believe that translation advocates and LGT theorists might be wavering.

To me, the Book of Mormon is what it is. No sense debating what Joseph Smith, the translator, didn't comment upon.

What is the evidence to support your assertion that Smith never commented on the translation process to Whitmer, Harris, Emma, Hale, Knight, or anyone one else who might have stopped by while he purported to translate the plates?

I suspect that you are overstating the evidence, which is something you would never allow a critic to get away with.