LDS

[skyrider44]

. . . "generous" is not even marginally appropriate. Your identification of Randfan was rude to him (affront intended or not), and to me, and to all other posters on the forum.

Oh, p l e a s e. Are you really that thin-skinned?

: Third, he is neither the most prolific nor the most prolix. If anything, he has been very active on these threads because he has a deep background, and can tell more easily than I, and some other posters, when LDS D&Cs are being misstated.

You unwittingly quasi-support my position by admitting that "he has been very active on these threads because he has a deep background. . . ."

: Fourth, when do you intend to address the anachronistic elements of BoM, about which I and others asked you a long time ago?

I did so several weeks ago. Because what I stated didn't conform to what I consider your biased angle of vision, you (or perhaps it was others) apparently ignored the information I provided. Are you unaware that many of the items mentioned in the BoM have been proven to exist in the pre-Columbian Americas? How would Joseph Smith, "author" of the BoM, have known about those items? Just lucky guesses, huh?

: Fifth, what is your take on the official distinction to be made among "people with 'black skin' " (even though no humans have black skin--human skin color ranges from pale pink to dark brown); "people of 'African descent' " (even though all humans come from African stock); and "people of 'Negro descent' " (even tough the term does not identify a homogeneity of heredity nor ethnicity, further, the term has been disavowed by the very people it is being applied to from without)?

Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed. I have already said as much. LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men. Do you derive some kind of pleasure--some sense of triumph--from supposing they are otherwise? To what end?

 

[John Jones]

oh, p l e a s e. Are you really that thin-skinned?

omfg! Pkb!

 

[skyrider44]

Well, I'm completely puzzled. Skyrider44 seems to be stalling at providing any evidence of existing artifacts. . . .

You err. I never said there were any artifacts. What I did say was that RandFan was expressing an opinion when he said there were no artifacts. He has since admitted that it was his opinion even though he stated it as an unqualified fact.

 

[John Jones]

You err. I never said there were any artifacts. What I did say was that RandFan was expressing an opinion when he said there were no artifacts. He has since admitted that it was his opinion even though he stated it as an unqualified fact.

He gets to do that. If you ever doubt a persons statement, you can ask them for evidence.

What you don't get to do is force him to explicitly label his opinions as such.

 

[Myriad]

I did so several weeks ago. Because what I stated didn't conform to what I consider your biased angle of vision, you (or perhaps it was others) apparently ignored the information I provided. Are you unaware that many of the items mentioned in the BoM have been proven to exist in the pre-Columbian Americas? How would Joseph Smith, "author" of the BoM, have known about those items? Just lucky guesses, huh?

Meh. Everything on that list is consistent with Smith just assuming that pre-Columbian civilizations in the Americas were just like the ancient Levantine civilizations described in the Bible. As are all the things he got wrong. It shows neither deliberate thoughtful extrapolation nor supernatural insight. More like the version of a Medieval tavern casually conjured up by the average D&D dungeon master, armchairs, glass windows, tobacco smoke, mechanical locks that can be "picked," weapons and armor from four centuries later, and all.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[tsig]

Oh, p l e a s e. Are you really that thin-skinned?



You unwittingly quasi-support my position by admitting that "he has been very active on these threads because he has a deep background. . . ."



I did so several weeks ago. Because what I stated didn't conform to what I consider your biased angle of vision, you (or perhaps it was others) apparently ignored the information I provided. Are you unaware that many of the items mentioned in the BoM have been proven to exist in the pre-Columbian Americas? How would Joseph Smith, "author" of the BoM, have known about those items? Just lucky guesses, huh?



Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed. I have already said as much. LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men. Do you derive some kind of pleasure--some sense of triumph--from supposing they are otherwise? To what end?

You err. I never said there were any artifacts. What I did say was that RandFan was expressing an opinion when he said there were no artifacts. He has since admitted that it was his opinion even though he stated it as an unqualified fact.

Items =/= artifacts?

 

[RandFan]

Are you unaware that many of the items mentioned in the BoM have been proven to exist in the pre-Columbian Americas? How would Joseph Smith, "author" of the BoM, have known about those items? Just lucky guesses, huh?

Name the items?

 

[jsfisher]

Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed.

We agree.

I have already said as much.

Yes, you did, but has the Church formally said Young goofed? I see change in policy, but not an actual admission Brigham Young got it wrong.

LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men. Do you derive some kind of pleasure--some sense of triumph--from supposing they are otherwise? To what end?

If the current LDS Prophet is fallible, how is he to be distinguished from a false prophet? The Bible is clear on how false prophets are to be identified and treated. What distinguishes Brigham Young from being a false prophet?

If the current LDS Prophet is fallible, why should his proclamations be accepted as the word of God, only to be overturned by some future LDS Prophet?

Your Prophet is unreliable, so why bother with one?

 

[showmevegas]

Name the items?

I am unaware of these anachronistic items. Show me. While your at it show me the hat,seer stones and golden tablets that Joseph used to found a religion. Pictures would be a start....Vetting authenticity would be next. Love to seer em

 

[Wolrab]

1) What items from the BoM existed in Pre-Columbian America?
2) Seeing how BY was a prophet of god and all, why couldn't god have said something when he noticed BY was screwing up god's word?

Seriously, this whole apologetic thing is stupid. Smith was a known con man that got lucky and got all the tail he wanted.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Oh, p l e a s e. Are you really that thin-skinned?

Not particularly thin-skinned, no--but you yourself felt you had need to say that you did not intend affront. I beleive it is important to point out, as oftne as necessary, that Randfan is not a spokesman. you were hoping, by the ruse of claiming that the M'bulu of M'bele of the Skeptics had been "caught in a lie", to discredit all argument against you; in reality, you are one of the few posters who seems to have a problem discerning an opinion...

You unwittingly quasi-support my position by admitting that "he has been very active on these threads because he has a deep background. . . ."

...and the ruse continues. Bluntly, Randfan is not anyone's "spokesman", "chief" or otherwise. Are you really that desperate?

I did so several weeks ago. Because what I stated didn't conform to what I consider your biased angle of vision, you (or perhaps it was others) apparently ignored the information I provided. Are you unaware that many of the items mentioned in the BoM have been proven to exist in the pre-Columbian Americas? How would Joseph Smith, "author" of the BoM, have known about those items? Just lucky guesses, huh?

IIRC, you did not so much enumerate which of the pre-colombian anachronisms in BoM have been "proven to exist", but simply claimed that I was ignorant of the state of mormon archaeology. Be so kind as to list,specifically, which of the anachronisms you are convinced have been "proved to exist"--with citations, and evidence.

Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed. I have already said as much. LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men. Do you derive some kind of pleasure--some sense of triumph--from supposing they are otherwise? To what end?

Which, as you are aware, absolutely does not address my question.

Further, if Young "goofed" when he was defining LDS D&C, why could it not be said that Smith "goofed" when he pretended to identify characteristics of mesoamerican society and culture that have not been supported? Or that he "goofed" when he pretended that the hypocephali from the Book of Breathing contained text written by Abraham's own hand?

 

[Pup]

You err. I never said there were any artifacts. What I did say was that RandFan was expressing an opinion when he said there were no artifacts. He has since admitted that it was his opinion even though he stated it as an unqualified fact.

So this is about arguing over debating techniques, rather than actually sharing information on the topic of the thread?

I find the fact that the church claims to have some of the original seer stones to be of more interest than interpersonal debating gotchas.

While looking through some of the stones' provenance, and seeing that Philo Dibble "later exhibited the stone, death masks and other historical objects on lecture tours which he conducted in Utah Territory," I noticed that for a while, there was a Salt Lake Museum and Menagerie.

It constantly amazes me how people conform to social trends. Everything was happening apace in Utah the same as it was in the rest of the country--lecturers with their cabinets of curiosities were giving away to full-scale "dime museums" by the late 19th century, that exhibited a hodgepodge of weird stuff, ostensibly for education but more for overhyped entertainment.

P. T. Barnum's American Museum in New York was of course one of the archetypes, and in the late 1860s, IIRC, he also added a menagerie to his museum. Col. Wood's big museum in Chicago was one of the other main ones, and it seems he was actually connected to the Pearl of Great Price mummy.

The dime museums were dying out by the early 20th century, being replaced by more organized and "serious" collections, and it looks like the Salt Lake museum followed the same trend.

 

[dafydd]

You err. I never said there were any artifacts.

Good, so now you know that Mormonism is based on a lie.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed. I have already said as much. LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men.

That has been my working assumption all along

 

[Hokulele]

That has been my working assumption all along

Heh, I wonder how they know that it was Young who goofed and not God?

God: No blacks.
Young: Got it, no blacks.

*Time passes*

God: Whoops, did I say blacks? I meant "no slacks, formal wear only." My bad. Good thing they will think they misheard, not that I misspoke. Woo hoo!

 

[Filippo Lippi]

It's not even the most incredible of their claims.

 

[jsfisher]

Oh, let's see.

⁶And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.

Hmm, dream and not hat. Therefore, Joseph Smith, false prophet.

³³For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
³⁷If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Hmm, implies God's instructions are both clear and have permanence. Therefore, Brigham Young, false prophet.

Am I missing something here?

 

[zooterkin]

Brigham Young, who initiated the priesthood ban involving blacks, goofed. I have already said as much. LDS prophets are fallible, mortal men.

Was Joseph Smith an LDS prophet?

Do you derive some kind of pleasure--some sense of triumph--from supposing they are otherwise? To what end?

Not pleasure, but we're not the ones claiming to relay the words of God. Pointing out that someone's words are consistent with being those of a fallible human rather than divinely inspired is a useful observation.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Heh, I wonder how they know that it was Young who goofed and not God?

God: No blacks.
Young: Got it, no blacks.

*Time passes*

God: Whoops, did I say blacks? I meant "no slacks, formal wear only." My bad. Good thing they will think they misheard, not that I misspoke. Woo hoo!

I wonder what he really meant when he said, "No booze"?

 

[Foster Zygote]

Was Joseph Smith an LDS prophet?

I'd like to get Janadele's thoughts on this as well. She has maintained that God had his reasons for withholding the priesthood from people of African descent. I wonder if she agrees with the "Brigham Young goofed" explanation?