Mormonism and polytheism

[_Tobin]

Nope you said ONLY ONE UNCORROBORATED ACCOUNT. There is corroborating evidence that he did teach it, and that it was taught right in front of him by his brother.

That is not corroboration. Other people could believe in unicorns for all I care and teach that they live under the sea and if Joseph Smith didn't correct them that doesn't mean he said this. Again, either you don't understand English or you simply do not read nor comprehend the material you link to. It reflects extremely poorly on you that you distort things this badly and do such sloppy work and do not read the material. It strains credulity that someone would be so blatantly dishonest about this material as you clearly are. Again, either provide a quote from someone else to corroborate Joseph Smith said this, or recant and tell the truth that there are none.

[_grindael]

You said there was just one uncorroborated account. I showed that there is more than one account of Mormon "prophets" teaching this. You just didn't understand what I originally said Tobin. As usual. I never said anything about Joseph Smith. YOU DID. Again, read with comprehension before you make your silly accusations.

[_grindael]

Also, if you had bothered to read the link where I explain all of this, you would know what I'm talking about. But not Tobin. LOL.

[_Tobin]

You said there was just one uncorroborated account. I showed that there is more than one account of Mormon "prophets" teaching this. You just didn't understand what I originally said Tobin. As usual. I never said anything about Joseph Smith. YOU DID. Again, read with comprehension before you make your silly accusations.

Ok, I'm putting you on ignore. You know very well what I was speaking about since I quoted Joan and have repeatedly and specifically asked you for quotes corroborating this account. Your response is thoroughly dishonest (no surprise) and I have no desire to discuss anything else with you on this forum again.

[_grindael]

Please do. Just like you put truth on ignore.

[_Joan]

That is funny coming from someone that doesn't believe anything a member of the Mormon Church has ever said. Here she'll take one uncorroborated account written over 40 years later over the whole of the History of the Church and everything else. Joan pretty much ignores anything that doesn't fit her preconceived fanciful notions or makes up her own stories about what happened or gets the facts completely wrong.

To be fair, you are taking extreme liberties with my words; especially since you don't even know me. I understand that twisting words and taking extreme liberties is something we were innately taught in the Mormon womb, but in this case let me clarify myself for you....

It's not that I don't believe ANYTHING a member of the Mormon church has EVER said. I have TROUBLE believing what's said, past and present, given the half-truths and full out lies which make it difficult to parse out and determine if there is actual full-blown truth in any of the mess.
You claim that I’m taking ONE account? By that do you mean Oliver B. Huntington?
Then what do you do with the life-on-moon accounts given by more than one?
Actually, Huntington’s information is partially corroborated by others like B.Young and JFSmith’s ideas about life on other planets…..but then we’re back full circle to parsing out half-truths and misinformation.



It’s hard to believe he wasn’t wrong given the other multitude of lies Smith has spewed. But for your sake I will hope that Huntington was wrong and Joseph Smith didn’t say they resembled quakers. Huntington may have been wrong and heard his contemporary Smith incorrectly; given all the other lies Huntington very well could have been wrong. This is what I mean by making it difficult to parse out truth from lies. You know the story ‘never cry wolf?’

Tobin, how do you parse out the lies from truth? Or do you believe there are people on the moon who resemble quakers? Yes or no.

George Carlin Garbage In, Garbage Out

You have a fondness for Carlin quotes?
Here’s my favorite Carlin message which I hope you enjoy this Sunday sermon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpL2m6XJhQw

in sharing,

Joan

[_Tobin]

That is funny coming from someone that doesn't believe anything a member of the Mormon Church has ever said. Here she'll take one uncorroborated account written over 40 years later over the whole of the History of the Church and everything else. Joan pretty much ignores anything that doesn't fit her preconceived fanciful notions or makes up her own stories about what happened or gets the facts completely wrong.

To be fair, you are taking extreme liberties with my words; especially since you don't even know me. I understand that twisting words and taking extreme liberties is something we were innately taught in the Mormon womb, but in this case let me clarify myself for you....

Actually, to be fair, I'm not taking any liberties with your words. I'm not even quoting you above. I'm characterizing what I believe accurately reflects what I've seen you post and convey on this forum.

It's not that I don't believe ANYTHING a member of the Mormon church has EVER said. I have TROUBLE believing what's said, past and present, given the half-truths and full out lies which make it difficult to parse out and determine if there is actual full-blown truth in any of the mess.

I disagree. You have problems with facts and history. You disbelieve anything that contradicts your limited view of the world or the one you wish to impose.

You claim that I’m taking ONE account? By that do you mean Oliver B. Huntington?

Yes

Then what do you do with the life-on-moon accounts given by more than one?

I give it the attention it deserves. It is most likely a faulty recollection.

Actually, Huntington’s information is partially corroborated by others like B.Young and JFSmith’s ideas about life on other planets…..but then we’re back full circle to parsing out half-truths and misinformation.

Again, that is not true. What others may or may not have believed does not corroborate that Joseph Smith said this in the slightest.

It’s hard to believe he wasn’t wrong given the other multitude of lies Smith has spewed. But for your sake I will hope that Huntington was wrong and Joseph Smith didn’t say they resembled quakers. Huntington may have been wrong and heard his contemporary Smith incorrectly; given all the other lies Huntington very well could have been wrong. This is what I mean by making it difficult to parse out truth from lies. You know the story ‘never cry wolf?’

There you go again. As Mike likes saying on here, you are jousting windmills.

Tobin, how do you parse out the lies from truth?

I use reason, logic, fact, the accounts themselves and so on. Clearly these are thing you just throw away from what I can gather. In fact, you often just make up stories or the facts.

Or do you believe there are people on the moon who resemble quakers? Yes or no.

There are no people living on the moon and no, since they do not exist - they do not look like quakers.

[_grindael]

There are no people living on the moon and no, since they do not exist - they do not look like quakers.

We know that, but Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith & Brigham Young obviously did not, because they taught that there were people living on the moon.

[_Joan]

There are no people living on the moon and no, since they do not exist - they do not look like quakers.

We know that, but Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith & Brigham Young obviously did not, because they taught that there were people living on the moon.

grindael, he seems to be a very strange man.
His mind fantasizes very easily doesn't it. He believes in his fantasy but rejects any form of logic if it jeopardizes his fantasized belief.
A very fascinating psychological study. Scary, but fascinating.

[_Res Ipsa]

I'm gonna be a heretic now and say that I find most of Tobin's reasoning very logical. I don't think the logic itself is any different from the logic of standard mopologetics. The difference is in the presuppositions. When a potential conflict is raised between facts and truth claims of Mormonism, the difference in presuppositions leads him to resolve or avoid any actual conflict differently than would orthodox mopologists. In particular, his worldview places much more importance on understanding Mormonism in light of scientific evidence. He takes flak from both camps because he ends up in places that look strange, but I don't think it's because he rejects logic.