Liahona Irreantum Rabbanah deseret

[_nc47]

I am sure it doesn't, since that would undermine what you are trying to believe.

That's ridiculous. And you are cooking up reasons to disbelieve in order to justify indulging your hedonistic appetities.

[_nc47]

There's no distinction between religion and magic in the ancient world (and among poor Christians of Joseph Smith's time), and without that understanding members get confused.

The treasure digging has been placed in proper context by Quinn, and by Samuel Brown. Once we understand the context, it's no longer a problem.

[_nc47]

There have been a recent spate of books on Mormonism from prestigious sources: Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard Presses. I recommend reading those instead of the trailer-park bait on the internet.

[_Themis]

That's ridiculous. And you are cooking up reasons to disbelieve in order to justify indulging your hedonistic appetities.

Hedonistic appetites. LOL I sense a personal attack. I don't need any reasons to cook up when you are the one you provided one. I find it interesting that one who believes Joseph was a prophet of God says what he says about how the Book of Abraham is brought forth doesn't matter to him. You have every right to do so, but it never worked for me. It makes little sense.

[_Themis]

There's no distinction between religion and magic in the ancient world (and among poor Christians of Joseph Smith's time), and without that understanding members get confused.

I don't that is the problem. Most people I know don't distinguish between religion and magic. I think the problem is seeing that he used a process employed by frauds, the same as they would crystal ball and such. It's not that they cannot be found in the Bible and other ancient sources, but we tend to have ignored them for the most part. If were just left to that I think there would be less of a problem, but we see Joseph using it to look for treasure for hire. Enough people must have thought it was not a legitimate practice back then to make laws against doing such for hire. If I grew up in his world I could myself wanting a seer stone to look for treasure as well. Why don't most people today not employ these kinds of things? Maybe for the same reason most of us religious or not will always seek medial help instead of just relying on things like priesthood blessings.

The treasure digging has been placed in proper context by Quinn, and by Samuel Brown. Once we understand the context, it's no longer a problem.

Oh I think for may once you understand the context it may become a bigger problem. How much treasure have people, including Joseph, found with this technique?

[_nc47]

There's no distinction between religion and magic in the ancient world (and among poor Christians of Joseph Smith's time), and without that understanding members get confused.

I don't that is the problem. Most people I know don't distinguish between religion and magic. I think the problem is seeing that he used a process employed by frauds, the same as they would crystal ball and such. It's not that they cannot be found in the Bible and other ancient sources, but we tend to have ignored them for the most part. If were just left to that I think there would be less of a problem, but we see Joseph using it to look for treasure for hire. Enough people must have thought it was not a legitimate practice back then to make laws against doing such for hire. If I grew up in his world I could myself wanting a seer stone to look for treasure as well. Why don't most people today not employ these kinds of things? Maybe for the same reason most of us religious or not will always seek medial help instead of just relying on things like priesthood blessings.

The treasure digging has been placed in proper context by Quinn, and by Samuel Brown. Once we understand the context, it's no longer a problem.

Oh I think for may once you understand the context it may become a bigger problem. How much treasure have people, including Joseph, found with this technique?

Like I said, middle class people during that time didn't find the practice legitimate but uneducated Christians like Joseph Smith, it was.

He found a horse and someone's wallet. People who knew him the best, like Josiah Stowell, trusted him. But that's beside the point, treasure digging's purpose was for more than financial rewards. Finding relics was a way to connect with the supernatural dead.

Joseph Smith's connections to hermeticism and Kaballah are well established. Whether there is a genetic link is not well-established, but regardless, no educated person can make claims about Joseph Smith without the context. When members hear about the stone-in-hat, they get creeped out (not me, that never creeped me out), but when they understand the context, they understand the tradition in which Joseph Smith was operating.

Richard Bushman's Faith Crisis Model
1. Glass testimony, everything is pristine.
2. Goes on the internet and reads someone's blog, glass breaks.
3. Stays in church long enough to understand the context, testimony is restored.

[_nc47]

That's ridiculous. And you are cooking up reasons to disbelieve in order to justify indulging your hedonistic appetities.

Hedonistic appetites. LOL I sense a personal attack. I don't need any reasons to cook up when you are the one you provided one. I find it interesting that one who believes Joseph was a prophet of God says what he says about how the Book of Abraham is brought forth doesn't matter to him. You have every right to do so, but it never worked for me. It makes little sense.

You already have a reason? Well happy hedonism! May you ever be guilt-free.

[_Themis]

Like I said, middle class people during that time didn't find the practice legitimate but uneducated Christians like Joseph Smith, it was.

So people today and back then were not that different after all. I don't know anyone who stopped believing on this issue alone, but it can start one to ask reasonable questions and seek more information.

He found a horse and someone's wallet. People who knew him the best, like Josiah Stowell, trusted him. But that's beside the point, treasure digging's purpose was for more than financial rewards. Finding relics was a way to connect with the supernatural dead.

Of course there are many reasons one may be interested in this. What we don't see is that they really worked, and most in today's society, and even back then didn't really thin they worked. I would think something that does work would be much more accepted like many of the modern technologies we use effectively today.

Joseph Smith's connections to hermeticism and Kaballah are well established. Whether there is a genetic link is not well-established, but regardless, no educated person can make claims about Joseph Smith without the context. When members hear about the stone-in-hat, they get creeped out (not me, that never creeped me out), but when they understand the context, they understand the tradition in which Joseph Smith was operating.

And what specifically are the parallelisms and how do we determine they mean what we may think they mean?

Richard Bushman's Faith Crisis Model
1. Glass testimony, everything is pristine.
2. Goes on the internet and reads someone's blog, glass breaks.
3. Stays in church long enough to understand the context, testimony is restored.

We could find people in other religions, including non-religious issues, where many will not change their beliefs no matter how much evidence is available.

[_Themis]

You already have a reason? Well happy hedonism! May you ever be guilt-free.

I see we are still making personal attacks. Is that really the christian thing to do? I don't see any other reasons why someone would dismiss what a person says about the Book of Abraham even though they believe this person is inspired of God. If we assume he was inspired by God how is it that you know better then he about what he was actually doing?

[Guest]

That may be a cause but the cognitive dissonance can be prevented with a proper knowledge of the historical background.

Which makes it all the more odd that the church isn't moving swiftly to teach an accurate historical context rather than the current inaccurate version.

I note you haven't answered my question about why you find Charlesworth more credible than Joseph Smith....