Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why the disclaimer -- "officially, anyway"? Are you under the delusion that we're still involved in the practice.
Nice piece of misdirection. They 'officially' repudiated polygamy at the time, but I recall that the practice went on unofficially at the time. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was still going unofficially here and there.
Quote:
And I'd say you "learned" wrong.
Uh... no such person for starters, which leads me to believe you're not checking your other facts very carefully either.
That would be the correct number. Like I say, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest whether people believe these twelve individuals or not. I'm just here to correct misconceptions -- like the one concerning how many individuals claimed to have seen and handled the plates. (By the way, they are not called the Plates of Nephi, but that's no biggie.)
By the way, I'm sure the author of the OP had absolutely no interest in debating the validity of the Book of Mormon. Maybe we ought to get back on topic. Ya think?
Not until I have had my say. So you are a mormon adherent eh? Well, you sure kept that quiet up till now.
BE IT KNOWN unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold ; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.
Right eight witnesses (Smith doesn't count of course) and it's Whitmer, not Whittaker. If you want to harp on a misremembering of the name - (I did the research back in the 80, chum) then you are welcome to this cheap point.
The signed testimony is unarguable, but I certainly recall that my previous researching cast up some doubts that these people really did see the plates and that Smith merely got them to sign a paper saying that they had.
Of course the burden of proof is on me to substantiate that. I don't mind it even if I can't. The book of Mormon is a concocted tale, Joseph Smith was a charlatan and couldn't even understand the 'Abraham Papyrus' let alone translate these supposed plates of Nephi (You can say Lehi if you like). So, to use your own words "Like I say, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest" what you believe. "I'm just here to correct misconceptions." about the claims the LDS church makes and, in that respect, it is on topic because the book of Mormon has a claim that Jesus appeared in America. Presumably at the time of resurrection. So that claim has to stand up.
Yes, many people do take it seriously. The fact that people do take it seriously and are sincere in their belief, should be sufficient reason for all of us to take their feelings into consideration in any disagreement we have.
While I do not agree with Mormon beliefs, I do see them as no less logical than the teachings of Fundamentalist Christianity. In many areas it even seems to be more logical.
I have no need to agree with Mormon beliefs to see that Mormons are people and deserving of being treated as people. there is no need to dwell on what one sees as error in Mormon, belief, the goal should be for all of us to present reason why we believe our own belief is true.
If I can not convince another that my belief is true, it is pointless to dwell on why I believe another person's belief is in error.
I take your point and Katzpur's. While I believe that people should be given both sides of any case for any theism, this isn't really the place for a debunking of LDS.
Is a "religious fanatic" a person who has different beliefs than you do? If not, what exactly is it? Any religious person? Or what?
noun
1.a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.
Would that definition not be correctly applied to Joseph Smith and those 11 disciples? Fanatic is not necessarily a negative term, though it is usually used that way.
No, the OP probably did not envision discussing the Book of Mormon, but he did want to discuss proof of Jesus. You offered up the Book of Mormon as another source validating Jesus' existence. As such, I think it's on topic, but that's just my opinion.
The thing I find funny about a lot of Christians is that they dismiss Scientology, Mormonism and even Islam as the rantings of delusional men - but they put full stock in the Bible. On its face, the Bible is no more believable than these other books/religions. So, why do they find it more realistic? Simply because it's older?
Nice piece of misdirection. They 'officially' repudiated polygamy at the time, but I recall that the practice went on unofficially at the time. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was still going unofficially here and there.
Yes, they "officially" repudiated it in 1890. Since most men didn't care to throw their wives and children into the street at the time, it did continue, but just for a few years, after which time it became cause for excommunication. Today, there is no faster way a Mormon can find to get himself excommunicated from the Church than to be found practicing polygamy. There are no exceptions.
Quote:
So you are a mormon adherent eh? Well, you sure kept that quiet up till now.
I'm sure at least 70% of the people posting on the Religion and Philosophy forum and well over 90% of the people posting on the Christianity forum know I'm LDS. The last thing I've ever done is keep it a secret.
Quote:
Right eight witnesses (Smith doesn't count of course)
No, there were eleven. There is a separate statement given by three other witnesses who saw the plates in another setting entirely. None of the eleven ever retracted their statements, even though a number of them later had a falling out with Joseph Smith and left the Church.
Quote:
...and it's Whitmer, not Whittaker. If you want to harp on a misremembering of the name - (I did the research back in the 80, chum) then you are welcome to this cheap point.
Wow, are you always this touchy when people point out your mistakes? Your other facts about him were wrong, too, by the way.
Quote:
The signed testimony is unarguable, but I certainly recall that my previous researching cast up some doubts that these people really did see the plates and that Smith merely got them to sign a paper saying that they had.
Of course the burden of proof is on me to substantiate that. I don't mind it even if I can't. The book of Mormon is a concocted tale, Joseph Smith was a charlatan and couldn't even understand the 'Abraham Papyrus' let alone translate these supposed plates of Nephi (You can say Lehi if you like). So, to use your own words "Like I say, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest" what you believe. "I'm just here to correct misconceptions." about the claims the LDS church makes and, in that respect, it is on topic because the book of Mormon has a claim that Jesus appeared in America. Presumably at the time of resurrection. So that claim has to stand up.
Look, this thread is not about the validity of the Book of Mormon. It's not about your opinion of Joseph Smith. And if you continue to derail the thread, your posts will be reported. It's not that I am opposed to debating my religion; it's that it's just not fair to the OP. This isn't the place for this particular debate.
14 million of them do. Of that number, two-thirds are first-generation converts, with roughly 800 per day converting worldwide.
Seriously, if I were the author of the OP, I'd be getting pretty pissed off right now. Let's talk about whether Jesus actually ever lived, okay? You want to talk about Mormonism? Start a new thread. I'm not shy.
You offered up the Book of Mormon as another source validating Jesus' existence. As such, I think it's on topic, but that's just my opinion.
Actually, it wasn't me. I just jumped in when the topic actually did go off topic. If we were talking about what the Book of Mormon had to say about Jesus Christ, that would have been an entirely different matter. Did you notice how many posts actually addressed that issue? I don't believe any of them did. They just immediately started attacking every aspects of Mormonism that happened to come to mind.
Quote:
The thing I find funny about a lot of Christians is that they dismiss Scientology, Mormonism and even Islam as the rantings of delusional men - but they put full stock in the Bible. On its face, the Bible is no more believable than these other books/religions. So, why do they find it more realistic? Simply because it's older?
Yes, they "officially" repudiated it in 1890. Since most men didn't care to throw their wives and children into the street at the time, it did continue, but just for a few years, after which time it became cause for excommunication. Today, there is no faster way a Mormon can find to get himself excommunicated from the Church than to be found practicing polygamy. There are no exceptions.
I'm sure at least 70% of the people posting on the Religion and Philosophy forum and well over 90% of the people posting on the Christianity forum know I'm LDS. The last thing I've ever done is keep it a secret.
No, there were eleven. There is a separate statement given by three other witnesses who saw the plates in another setting entirely. None of the eleven ever retracted their statements, even though a number of them later had a falling out with Joseph Smith and left the Church.
Wow, are you always this touchy when people point out your mistakes? Your other facts about him were wrong, too, by the way.
Look, this thread is not about the validity of the Book of Mormon. It's not about your opinion of Joseph Smith. And if you continue to derail the thread, your posts will be reported. It's not that I am opposed to debating my religion; it's that it's just not fair to the OP. This isn't the place for this particular debate.
Please see my post above. I agree that was getting off topic and I accept that my memory was faulty after forty years. As for reporting me, do so if it makes you happy.
Please see my post above. I agree that was getting off topic and I accept that my memory was faulty after forty years. As for reporting me, do so if it makes you happy.
I only said I would report additional off-topic posts. I haven't reported anything at this point and don't intend to. As far as "making me happy" goes, that's not why I report posts. I just don't like to see threads go as far off-topic as this one has.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
