H
Horton
Guest
So much this^^^^ It kills me when people say the LDS have such great family values. The Christian religions all teach good family values and none do it better than the Catholic Church.
- Status
G
gazelam
Guest
Why state what you think the OP means? Isn’t the OP capable of answering for himself if he so chooses?
H
Horton
Guest
L
Lemuel
Guest
Last I heard, he has turned atheist, but I’m not sure. That’s the common path of ex-Mo’s. As far as his family goes, I have no clue.
L
Lemuel
Guest
This is what I was taught most of my life, and is what I taught as a missionary.
Moroni, the person who deposited the plates from whence the Book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom appeared unto me, and told me where they were and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon. (Elders Journal , 1, pp. 42-3, July 1838).
It’s also interesting to note that the original Pearl of Great Price named Nephi as the angel, not Moroni.
Just more messiness . . .! (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Moroni, the person who deposited the plates from whence the Book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom appeared unto me, and told me where they were and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon. (Elders Journal , 1, pp. 42-3, July 1838).
It’s also interesting to note that the original Pearl of Great Price named Nephi as the angel, not Moroni.
Just more messiness . . .! (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
L
Lemuel
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
This is how the Mormon Church portrayed it on their website in 2012. It’s interesting that we see no interpreters and no rock in a hat. Hmmmmm . . .
This is how the Mormon Church portrayed it on their website in 2012. It’s interesting that we see no interpreters and no rock in a hat. Hmmmmm . . .
P
Pattylt
Guest
Versus how it really happened…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
C
Chris-Wa1
Guest
Yeah you won’t see this picture in an LDS chapel, at Temple Square, or in a missionary discussion. I would respect them more if they would use it, then at least they would be partially honest.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Choose made up claim A or B.
Or C) none of the above.
Or C) none of the above.
Last edited:
L
Lemuel
Guest
Here’s how “Preach My Gospel” explains it:
Joseph Smith was directed by a heavenly messenger named
No mention of the interpreters or the rock in his hat.
Then is says:
In order to know that the Book of Mormon is true, a person must read it and ponder and pray about it. The honest seeker of truth will soon come to feel that the Book of Mormon is the word of God.
Is the corollary to this that if you don’t feel that the Book of Mormon is the word of God that you are a dishonest seeker of truth?
Note: I just threw
Last edited:
L
Lemuel
Guest
Here’s what the Church currently teaches the Primary children about the translation:
Once Joseph and Emma Smith were settled in Harmony, Pennsylvania, Joseph began to translate the gold plates. At first Joseph spent a lot of time becoming familiar with the plates and the language in which they were written. As he studied and prayed, the Urim and Thummim helped him understand the characters on the plates. Joseph learned that the process of translation requires faith, hard work, worthiness, patience, and obedience.
Where is the mention of the rock in his hat? If that’s what happened and the Church is not ashamed of it, then why not teach it? This is what I would call a lie of omission.
The brainwashing starts early . . .
Once Joseph and Emma Smith were settled in Harmony, Pennsylvania, Joseph began to translate the gold plates. At first Joseph spent a lot of time becoming familiar with the plates and the language in which they were written. As he studied and prayed, the Urim and Thummim helped him understand the characters on the plates. Joseph learned that the process of translation requires faith, hard work, worthiness, patience, and obedience.
Where is the mention of the rock in his hat? If that’s what happened and the Church is not ashamed of it, then why not teach it? This is what I would call a lie of omission.
The brainwashing starts early . . .
Last edited:
N
NeuroTypical
Guest
Here’s a recent video from my church. At 2:30 we see the rock in the hat. Does this qualify as “teaching it”?
L
Lemuel
Guest
In my opinion, no. To me this video was an attempt to work yourselves out of an uncomfortable situation.
Teaching it would mean that the rock in a hat is clearly explained in your lesson manuals, i.e., Preach My Gospel, the Primary manuals, the new member lesson manual, the gospel doctrine manuals, seminary lessons, YW lessons, the priesthood and RS manuals, IN ADDITION to over the pulpit talks in sacrament meetings and general conference. I have not done an exhaustive search. I only looked up a couple of your lesson manuals and references to the rock and hat seemed to not be there. Perhaps you can help me out?
Last edited:
S
snarflemike
Guest
As an outsider (no affiliation with Mormonism), I started reading this letter out of curiosity, and I must say it is one fascinating document.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Oh look, what was once brushed off as anti-Mormn lies is now God’s truth.
G
gazelam
Guest
Of course, it was mentioned in the September 1974 Friend, and again in the September 1977 Ensign. Another mention is in the Janaury 1988 Ensign, and again by the late Elder Neal Naxwell, who said this:
We are looking beyond the mark today, for example, if we are more interested in the physical dimensions of the cross than in what Jesus achieved thereon; or when we neglect Alma’s words on faith because we are too fascinated by the light-shielding hat reportedly used by Joseph Smith during some of the translating of the Book of Mormon . To neglect substance while focusing on process is another form of unsubmissively looking beyond the mark." ( Neal A. Maxwell, Not My Will, But Thine, Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1988, p. 26.)
You’re probably tired of all the seer stone references from The Church of Jesus Christ, but there are even more! Please see the July 1993 Ensign and also the January 1997 Ensign.
Oh look, what was taught consistently in the past is still taught today.
G
gazelam
Guest
How many mistake will you tolerate in the CES letter and still consider it credible? Item #11 specifically claims that the Book of Mormon contains “Trinitarian language”, and yet each of the examples provided are patently non-Trinitarian. For a description of the doctrine of the Trinity see this.
Also, regarding Joseph Smith’s use of the seer stone, the CES letter on page 29 specifically says “Unlike the story I’ve been taught in Sunday School, Priesthood, General Conferences, Seminary, EF Y, Ensigns, Church history tour, Missionary Training Center, and BYU…Joseph Smith used a rock in a hat for translating the Book of Mormon.”
Here I just posted several references to the seer stone in Church publications long before there ever was a CES Letter.
So we see that the claims of the CES Letter quickly crumbles upon semi-close inspection. How accurate do you believe the CES Letter needs to be in order for it to be a serious document?
Last edited:
L
Lemuel
Guest
Yep, like you said, it was “mentioned”. Like I didn’t already know of that. I’ve never said otherwise. The first time I remember learning about the rock in the hat was probably about 30 years ago, long after my mission where I taught otherwise. My brother pointed those and other references out to me. I’ve known this. I asked to know which teaching curriculum describes it, Primary, seminary, Preach My Gospel, etc. I’m not saying it’s not there. I’d just like to see it.
L
Lemuel
Guest
I concur. We were not taught those things in my earlier life.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Ah, the gaslighting since about 2013. “You would have known if you had only looked.” Come now G, be honest, it was as shocking to, you as it was to every Mormon.RebeccaJ:
Oh look, what was taught consistently in the past is still taught today.
It’s well documented, from FAIR to even Ask Gramps, that the seer stone translation was denied as a anti-Mormon lie. Fawn Brodie brought it up in her book, and Nibley called her a liar for it.
Now the Mormon masses pretend like everyone always knew about the seer stone, and to say otherwise is an anti-Mormon lie. I don’t how you all are able to even think yourselves out the door in the morning, with all that mental effort spent on internal apologetics going to and fro, and keeping tabs on, what’s the party line this morning.
ETA: Lest you think I’m advocating for one version or the other as describing a factual event, be assured, I view it all as an ever changing fairytale.
Last edited:
- Status