LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, I was being flip. She referred to Jesus Christ as the greatest scientist, and I called him JC. Probably not a good idea in a thread where we're talking about Joseph Smith and calling him JS. :)
:o My mistake. Sorry.
 
The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

...odd that (apparently) the same Jesus, called (by some) the Christ, mandated the use of alcohol to celebrate a sacrament...
 
By the way, where's your proof the Joseph Smith wasn't a convicted con-artist? The public record seems clear.

Let's see how much you really know about Joseph Smith's "criminal" record, starting with the so-called 1826 trial. Please tell me about it.
 
The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

PLEASE, PLEASE place your response AFTER the quoted material!
 
Alcohol will always be harmful to the human body, this does not change.
Bacteria is also harmful to the human body.

BYU said:
source Nineteenth-century migrants traveling across America suffered from many diseases as they journeyed to new homes in the West. The disease that was most common and caused the highest rate of illness and death was cholera. Historian Robert Carter notes, "It was a disease with which people were . . . familiar, yet it was little understood. It would strike suddenly, with no warning, often killing the victim within hours of the first symptoms. It was so uncontrollable that often entire families, even whole emigrating companies, would be wiped out. " While cholera was not always fatal, it brought fear and suffering into the lives of nineteenth-century travelers.
Know how to prevent cholera?

WebMD said:
source However, you can protect yourself and your family by using only water that has been boiled
Why didn't god bother to tell the saints to boil their water? Why go on and on about wine when the real killer was in their drinking water?
 
Let's see how much you really know about Joseph Smith's "criminal" record, starting with the so-called 1826 trial. Please tell me about it.


I see you are back to evasion. So, when you wrote this:

You make a reckless, unsupportable charge--one that has been dear to the hearts of critics for generations. I will deal with it in a separate post.

...what you meant was you wouldn't deal with it; instead you'd try to turn the question around so you wouldn't have to deal with it. Well played.
 
There is no shame in admitting that one's argument is erroneous.

You lost the debate when you claimed that the last sentence in the introduction refers to a fraction of the Book of Mormon (Book of Ether), rather than to the BoM in its entirety. That view is groundless--and absurd.

Personally, between the two of you, I'd say it was more of a draw. :D It wasn't specific to the Book of Ether, it was indeed to the entire Book of Mormon. However, at the same time I don't see that you won either. You argued on erroneously that the summary was written by Joseph Smith -- and it wasn't.

[Still can't post links, sorry]In forums. randi.org/showpost.php?p=8898122&postcount=1316 Skyrider44 wrote the following:
In light of the foregoing, your reproduction of the original introduction is irrelevant. Why? Because as later editions of the BoM were published, editors changed the introduction to clarify Joseph Smith's intended meaning. They could clearly see (as could virtually anyone) that the last sentence was meant to summarize the entire introduction, not merely the Book of Ether. Common sense and context told them that. Why would Joseph Smith summarize only the Book of Ether in his introduction to the entire book? That makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Personally, between the two of you, I'd say it was more of a draw. :D It wasn't specific to the Book of Ether, it was indeed to the entire Book of Mormon.

To be clear, my claim was that the passage belonged to the second paragraph and that it was not a comment on the translation. The paragraph introduces the people of Jared and the Book of Ether, but it also mentions God confounding language and scattering people...and the fault be in the action of men, not of God. You can easily consider that as a broader statement referring to the stories in the Book of Mormon, in general. I'm fine with that, but still, the referent is to the Book's content, not the translation.

I really see no basis at all to claim the sentence is semantically completely separate from the paragraph that contains it nor that it refers to the translation. The fact the words are Moroni's, not Smith's, further supports that it is not about the translation.
 
To be clear...
Thanks, as you know, I came in just a little late in all this.

I really see no basis at all to claim the sentence is semantically completely separate from the paragraph that contains it nor that it refers to the translation. The fact the words are Moroni's, not Smith's, further supports that it is not about the translation.
I agree entirely. Thanks for clearing that all up. In that case I'd have to say you won! :jaw-dropp
 
Thanks, as you know, I came in just a little late in all this.


I agree entirely. Thanks for clearing that all up. In that case I'd have to say you won! :jaw-dropp

Well, if I were unclear before, I can't claim a clear victory now. But thanks.


By the way, before you arrived I'd asked about the upper levels of LDS Church management. Do I understand correctly that there is a prophet and a council of some sort? The prophet as a role that parallels that of the Pope?

What can you tell me about the powers, responsibilities, and privileges of them?
 
I see you are back to evasion. So, when you wrote this:



...what you meant was you wouldn't deal with it; instead you'd try to turn the question around so you wouldn't have to deal with it. Well played.

You made the charge--and a sweeping one at that--now you're obligated to back it up, beginning with the "trial" of 1826.
 
You made the charge--and a sweeping one at that--now you're obligated to back it up, beginning with the "trial" of 1826.
Do you deny that Smith was tried for fraud? Do you deny that Smith used seer stones to search for buried treasure prior to his claim of finding the Gold Plates?
 
The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

And yet he turned water into wine for a wedding party. Hmmm.
 
Skyrider44, why is it that the whole of the scientific community studying human genetics has reached a conclusion that differs from that of the studies published by the Maxwell Institute? Are you now going to characterize the vast majority of the human genetics community as being anti-Mormons bent on "savagely" discrediting the BoM? We aren't talking about about minor inconsistencies or simple errors in language mechanics. The rather grand claims that Joseph Smith wrote in the BoM have absolutely no supporting evidence. There is zero evidence of the civilization described. There is nothing in archaeology, anthropology or hereditary surveys to confirm the claim.
 
No... not "wine" as the word means today. but the pure fruit of the vine. Not fermented nor alcoholic.

I have reported this post for drivin us all nuts by not putting things in the proper order.... seriously , it's not rocket surgery
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom