Kishkumen wrote: In your deliberately blinkered attempt to "summarize" the goings on here, you completely ignore the fact that Joseph Smith is the one who authored the testimony. They didn't voluntarily and spontaneously say that Joseph Smith translated the plates. He wrote a statement that they signed their names to. He wrote it in that way because he wanted their names signed to a statement that identified him as the translator of the plates they touched.
Do we know if they actually signed any document. I am not aware that we have any signed document today, but was there supposed to have been one in the past that they actually signed their names to?
Chap wrote:That increases my sense that what we have here is an intelligent LDS poseur, who has been attempting to use the 'Hey! I ain't nuttin'.' persona of stemelbow to increase the noise to signal ratio on the board, and hence reduce the effectiveness of threads that deal with subjects he finds uncongenial.
It is the pose of the inoffensive troll. The petty time-waster.
"Aw shucks, golly, I know you guys have yer arguments and evidence, but I just don't agree! Now quit being mean about Mormonism, because that is the only possible reason you would talk about evidence and arguments, right?"
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Themis wrote:Do we know if they actually signed any document. I am not aware that we have any signed document today, but was there supposed to have been one in the past that they actually signed their names to?
Themis wrote:Do we know if they actually signed any document. I am not aware that we have any signed document today, but was there supposed to have been one in the past that they actually signed their names to?
But ... but ... those names are all in the same handwriting! Aren't they? Look at the eamples of capital letter J and Ws. (the autocorrect won't let me put an s after a J without changing it into 'Joseph Smith')
They aren't individual signatures at all. So whose is the handwriting??
Am I right in guessing that this is not supposed be the original version of the testimony at all, put some part of a MS of the Book of Mormon?
Last edited by Guest on Fri May 18, 2012 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Themis wrote:Do we know if they actually signed any document. I am not aware that we have any signed document today, but was there supposed to have been one in the past that they actually signed their names to?
Do we know who wrote this? It appears that the names are all written by the same person, not that they are trying to suggest otherwise. I am not an expert on hand writing but it does appear to be written by one person.
I noticed that, too, but I just figured I didn't know what I was looking at. Maybe they all had similar handwriting, I don't know.
The preceding page contains the last verses of the Book of Mormon and the testimony of the Three, so I think this probably is a just a manuscript and not the original statement that the witness are meant to have signed.
Kishkumen wrote:Well, stem, you can bellyache about others' misdirected anger and resentment as though your corrections were going to help. You could also abandon that hopeless endeavor and just behave in a manner that isn't liable to feed resentment, misdirected or otherwise.
There is the fact of how people have responded, and your moralizing observations about how they have responded. The difference between the fool and the wise man in this instance is that the fool complains about the outcome, while the wise man tries to preempt the outcome by not contributing to its causes.
You can yell at the cupboard when you bump your head on it, or you can just look where you stick your head next time. Learn to identify what you have control over, and try to ignore those things that you can't control. I know I am one to talk, but it is a decent observation for all of us to consider.
Do not fret. I consider it. Someone needs to say something, though.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Sophocles wrote:I noticed that, too, but I just figured I didn't know what I was looking at. Maybe they all had similar handwriting, I don't know.
The preceding page contains the last verses of the Book of Mormon and the testimony of the Three, so I think this probably is a just a manuscript and not the original statement that the witness are meant to have signed.
Along the right hand side, it appears to be bound and then there is writing on what would be the facing page.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
Sophocles wrote:I noticed that, too, but I just figured I didn't know what I was looking at. Maybe they all had similar handwriting, I don't know.
The preceding page contains the last verses of the Book of Mormon and the testimony of the Three, so I think this probably is a just a manuscript and not the original statement that the witness are meant to have signed.
Along the right hand side, it appears to be bound and then there is writing on what would be the facing page.
"Source Note
Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer Jr., and others, The Testimony of Eight Witnesses, Palymra, NY, ca. June–Aug. 1829; handwriting of Oliver Cowdery; in Book of Mormon Printer’s Manuscript, p. 464; CCLA."
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
Kishkumen wrote:Go ahead and argue the case. You have to somehow ignore the fact that the witnesses signed a statement, authored by Joseph Smith, that claimed that he translated the leaves of the plates they touched with their own hands. Unfortunately for you, the document itself would contradict your argument.
Your naked contradiction is noted, and it is exactly what I would expect, based on your usual modus operandi. Faced with the evidence to the contrary, you can't do much more than disagree in a manner that lacks any substance. You don't have an argument.
It wasn't naked. I provided the explanation. You quoted my first sentence and ignored the rest, it seems.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.