Joseph Smith: Liar, Lunatic, or Lord

[drumdude]

It’s so interesting when LDS apostles plagiarize from Christian apologetics, almost always without credit. Holland here is quoting C.S. Lewis’ famous argument about Jesus almost verbatim:

https://youtu.be/Wx0lwGcgrmE

It’s embarrassing seeing Holland use this argument, because it makes him look completely oblivious to all of the insurmountable problems with the Book of Mormon. And it makes him look either completely unaware of or completely dismissive of the growing movement within his religion to take the Book of Mormon less literally.

[toon]

I believe it was Ehrmann who pointed out that this weren’t the only options re Jesus. A sincere misunderstanding was one. And perhaps most likely, errors and misunderstandings and misinterpretations by subsequent disciples.

Not sure that applies in the same manner to Smith.

[Wonhyo]

While some LDS leaders have credited from the pulpit the non-Mormon sources they are using, it seems to me that it's quite rare.

A recent case-in-point is Apostle Bednar, who, back in the October 2022 conference, used a large chunk of a sermon from a preacher of another faith without giving credit to that preacher over the pulpit. It looks like the printed version of Bednar's talk was modified later to give proper credit. But if the issue hadn't been brought to light by columnist Jana Reiss and others, it is doubtful that Bednar would have ever acknowledged the original source.

https://religionnews.com/2022/10/06/lds ... id-bednar/

On the issue of the "either/or" argument that leaders love to make when it comes to Joseph Smith's claims and work product, the leaders' lack of nuance (and their lack of patience for nuance) has undermined the belief in the org that many of us used to have.

[Rivendale]

It’s so interesting when LDS apostles plagiarize from Christian apologetics, almost always without credit. Holland here is quoting C.S. Lewis’ famous argument about Jesus almost verbatim:

https://youtu.be/Wx0lwGcgrmE

It’s embarrassing seeing Holland use this argument, because it makes him look completely oblivious to all of the insurmountable problems with the Book of Mormon. And it makes him look either completely unaware of or completely dismissive of the growing movement within his religion to take the Book of Mormon less literally.

Brian Hales has a recent Facebook thread where he again asks critics to explain where Joseph got all of the words to write the Book of Mormon. Using language like illusion, or unreliable to describe most of the interlocutors arguments. He also asks for evidence that Joseph had over 6 years to write the Book of Mormon yet ignoring simple answers to his own challenge. Several people ask him to use the same logic on the Koran or any other non Mormon related "scripture" and he ignored that also.

[Wonhyo]

Brian Hales has a recent Facebook thread where he again asks critics to explain where Joseph got all of the words to write the Book of Mormon. Using language like illusion, or unreliable to describe most of the interlocutors arguments. He also asks for evidence that Joseph had over 6 years to write the Book of Mormon yet ignoring simple answers to his own challenge. Several people ask him to use the same logic on the Koran or any other non Mormon related "scripture" and he ignored that also.

I've read commentary from Mormons that the Book of Mormon and the Quran or Koran are apples and oranges, namely because there were witnesses to Joseph's translation work and its details, while there are no witnesses to the series of revelations to Muhammed resulting in the Quran. Apparently, this is a satisfactory treatment of the comparison of the Book of Mormon to the Quran in many Mormons' minds.

Brian Hales, like many Mopologists and even like many regular Diet Coke Mormons, has to scrape the bottom of the apologetics barrel in order to keep it together faith-wise.

[drumdude]

The witnesses argument might be convincing until you find out that we actually have the papyrus of the book of Abraham and it doesn’t match Joseph’s story.

It explains why the gold plates “disappeared” back into heaven. Joseph wouldn’t want anyone finding his fake Egyptian scribbles on the prop plates and comparing them to real ones on readily available papyrus.

[msnobody]

While some LDS leaders have credited from the pulpit the non-Mormon sources they are using, it seems to me that it's quite rare.

A recent case-in-point is Apostle Bednar, who, back in the October 2022 conference, used a large chunk of a sermon from a preacher of another faith without giving credit to that preacher over the pulpit. It looks like the printed version of Bednar's talk was modified later to give proper credit. But if the issue hadn't been brought to light by columnist Jana Reiss and others, it is doubtful that Bednar would have ever acknowledged the original source.

https://religionnews.com/2022/10/06/lds ... id-bednar/

On the issue of the "either/or" argument that leaders love to make when it comes to Joseph Smith's claims and work product, the leaders' lack of nuance (and their lack of patience for nuance) has undermined the belief in the org that many of us used to have.

Seems Church of The Great God may be one of the offshoots that continued to adhere to Armstrongism after The Worldwide Church of God underwent major doctrinal changes.

[Philo Sofee]

It’s so interesting when LDS apostles plagiarize from Christian apologetics, almost always without credit. Holland here is quoting C.S. Lewis’ famous argument about Jesus almost verbatim:

https://youtu.be/Wx0lwGcgrmE

It’s embarrassing seeing Holland use this argument, because it makes him look completely oblivious to all of the insurmountable problems with the Book of Mormon. And it makes him look either completely unaware of or completely dismissive of the growing movement within his religion to take the Book of Mormon less literally.

Brian Hales has a recent Facebook thread where he again asks critics to explain where Joseph got all of the words to write the Book of Mormon. Using language like illusion, or unreliable to describe most of the interlocutors arguments. He also asks for evidence that Joseph had over 6 years to write the Book of Mormon yet ignoring simple answers to his own challenge. Several people ask him to use the same logic on the Koran or any other non Mormon related "scripture" and he ignored that also.

Yeah, Colby Townsend and I just examined this with the book "Visions in a Seer Stone." Hales is simply attempting to buy time to put off the utterly inevitable.

[Rivendale]

Brian Hales has a recent Facebook thread where he again asks critics to explain where Joseph got all of the words to write the Book of Mormon. Using language like illusion, or unreliable to describe most of the interlocutors arguments. He also asks for evidence that Joseph had over 6 years to write the Book of Mormon yet ignoring simple answers to his own challenge. Several people ask him to use the same logic on the Koran or any other non Mormon related "scripture" and he ignored that also.

Yeah, Colby Townsend and I just examined this with the book "Visions in a Seer Stone." Hales is simply attempting to buy time to put off the utterly inevitable.

Bill and Brian had a biblically long Facebook thread on a private group regarding his book in response to Brian's claim. Finally Bill just came to the conclusion that Brian is not interested in a conversation. Brian is interested in using 16 penny nails to pound his testimony into roofing tarpaper. Each time the arguments blow off the paper he uses a razor knife to cut holes in new paper to fit snuggle into the previous holes.

[Moksha]

There were many great talks given in the Church of Religious Science and The Teachings of the Inner Christ. Ambitious workers at Church HQ should crib some of these talks and pass them on to select Brethren who reward initiative. I doubt anyone would be able to sleuth down their origin and they would be exciting new material.