Book of Mormon foolishness--Jaredite ships

[Jerusha]

And, given the LDS prohibition against suicide, the whole thing becomes more clear when you look at the depression rate.

**42. **Wyoming
**43. **Ohio
**44. **Missouri
**45. **Idaho
**46. **Oklahoma
**47. **Nevada
**48. **Rhode Island
**49. **Kentucky
**50. **West Virginia
**51. **Utah

 

[Jerusha]

And, in a Mormon-dominated society, depression is diagnosed quickly and easily, and meds are passed out freely, helping people cope with a sick culture and belief system. Would you like for me to get into a description of the book I sarcastically call “The Miracle of Condemnation?”

 

[mormonpro]

And, in a Mormon-dominated society, depression is diagnosed quickly and easily, and meds are passed out freely, helping people cope with a sick culture and belief system. Would you like for me to get into a description of the book I sarcastically call “The Miracle of Condemnation?”

For many years now Utah has led the nation in anti-depressant use, and yes most are Mormons. As reported by the Salt Lake Tribune on March 7,2008 "Wendy, a 40-year-old teacher and mother of three from Utah County. To all appearances, she led the perfect life. Just as she was expected to, she went from high school cheerleader to Mormon missionary to wife and mother… "(Wendy became depressed and started using anti-depressants) The article continues; “Wendy’s secret is Utah’s secret. The postcard image of Utah is a state of gleaming cities, majestic mountains and persistently smiling people. But new research shows a very different picture of the state, a snapshot of suicide and widespread depression.
A recent study by Mental Health America, the country’s oldest independent mental health advocacy organization, ranked Utah the most depressed state in the country.
Another survey released last week by drug distribution company Express Scripts found that residents of Utah were prescribed antidepressant drugs more than those of any other state and at twice the national average.”
I live in Utah and have seen this scenario many, many times and I am firmly convinced that evil can never produce happiness no matter how much that evil is cloaked in “I know Joseph Smith is a true Prophet and that the LDS church is the true church” brainwashing. False faith in a false religion is producing anxiety and depression on a huge scale just as True faith in Gods true Catholic church produces joy and deliverance from sin and depression to all who are faithful to Christ’s truth…

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

Let’s get back on topic folks…

 

[PaulDupre]

Hello, all, and hello, Paul, (and Jerusha I hope you have had a wonderful day),
I appreciate the discussion about “glass windows” and “glass panes,” because it has brought me to think about the verses in Ether where this discussion between Jehovah (in the spirit) and the brother of Jared takes place.

An important principle commonly taught in LDS teachings is that humankind are to do all that they can on their own, including using reason and intellect, before expecting or hoping for the guidance of the Spirit or the guidance of the Lord. This experience described in Ether matches that process precisely…

I think you have missed completely the point of the discussion. The Book of Ether text says

23 And the Lord said unto the brother of Jared: What will ye that I should do that ye may have light in your vessels? For behold, ye cannot have windows, for they will be dashed in pieces;

The “Lord’s” comment to the brother of Jared assumes that the brother of Jared knows what glass window panes are and so he would understand the Lord’s reluctance to install glass windows in the barges.

Otherwise, the brother of Jared’s response would have been “Lord, what is this “windows” of which thou speakest that would be dashed to pieces? I know of no such thing. Verily, I beseecheth thee to explaineth this exceeding confusing statement of thine.”

Since window panes were first made by Muslims in the 11th century AD, there is simply no way that the brother of Jared could have known what they were.

But Sydney Rigdon and Joseph Smith didn’t know that.

 

[PaulDupre]

Have you seen the young binge drink? Or engage in premarital sex only because it feels good? Tattoo their bodies because its cool? Take drugs? Use their bodies only for pleasure and a good time?

The mormons caution against this aspect of amusement park activity.

The Catholic Church cautions against it, too. But like Mormon kids, many Catholic kids ignore the advice. Perhaps the only difference is that Mormon kids pretend that they obey all the rules while breaking them, while Catholic kids tend to break the rules openly. Many LDS live double lives.

 

[ParkerD]

I think you have missed completely the point of the discussion. The Book of Ether text says

The “Lord’s” comment to the brother of Jared assumes that the brother of Jared knows what glass window panes are and so he would understand the Lord’s reluctance to install glass windows in the barges.

Otherwise, the brother of Jared’s response would have been “Lord, what is this “windows” of which thou speakest that would be dashed to pieces? I know of no such thing. Verily, I beseecheth thee to explaineth this exceeding confusing statement of thine.”

Since window panes were first made by Muslims in the 11th century AD, there is simply no way that the brother of Jared could have known what they were.

But Sydney Rigdon and Joseph Smith didn’t know that.

Paul,
Perhaps you hadn’t read an earlier post I had made, or didn’t give it much thought.

I’ll explain a little differently, or you may go back and read the earlier comment also. Language conveys ideas and meanings, of course. A translated or transliterated text will attempt to do multiple things–it will attempt to convey the idiom of the original language that is being translated, and it will attempt to bring the text into the usage that will be understood by readers in a way that makes sense in the modern language.

As I had stated in the part you disputed, the brother of Jared could easily have come up with the idea in his mind of what we would call a window but he might not have a word for since it hadn’t been invented or made, yet it could be imagined. How hard is it for an intelligent person to imagine a thing like a window, for anyone who looks into water and sees the rocks on the bottom of a river and anyone who is familiar with molten anything–that is, a solid that has been heated to the point of melting and being malleable to harden into a different shape?

So what if Joseph Smith used the word “window” in the translation, instead of “a transparent or translucent material that would allow light to pass through” from the outside into the interior of the safe haven portion of the barge? My goodness, to ascribe to Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon the sophistication and intellect to contrive the Book of Mormon from their own minds, yet to use the word “window” if they were just trying to mimic ancient language with a supposedly ancient story, is self-contradictory logic.

“Window made of glass” just happens to match the idea that was in the brother of Jared’s mind, and the Lord being able to read his mind, could reply to the thought unspoken (or spoken), that “what you’re thinking about would be breakable material and would be dashed into pieces by the water and the storms.” The translation would convey in simplest language what the modern reader would understand, and the most logical word to explain that was “window”. It doesn’t mean the Lord used the Jaredite (pre-tower of Babel) form of a word that in the future of the world would mean “window”. The Lord could have been speaking directly into the brother of Jared’s mind anyway, with idea logic rather than word logic.

Again, the brother of Jared was most interested in getting to the “right idea” rather than explaining his “wrong idea” or the other potential “wrong idea” of using fire in the vessels. He wanted to proceed with the story and get to the lessons from the whole experience, so we readers whom he had in mind could get the message of the symbolism of the story (my word, not his), and plow into what he learned about Jesus Christ and our relationship to Him.

The “right idea” was the small clear molten transparent “rocks” that could be touched by Jesus Christ and become luminous (an obvious symbol of Jesus Christ Himself), and those luminous sources of light could be tied and suspended on rope hanging slightly below the ceiling of the barges.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Parker, I know you are sincere, but honestly I can’t take what you are saying seriously.

 

[why_me]

Parker, I know you are sincere, but honestly I can’t take what you are saying seriously.

If a glass like material was known, it would not be hard to imagine that someone would get the idea of making something out of it to enclose a window type opening.

As far as Parker’s other points, just look at what critics have done with the word tapir. This is an unknown word and because of it, an unknown animal. I have seen critics mock this word. And yet, why would JS include it in the book, if not taken directly from a translation?

 

[humble_in_doubt]

On a side note … all the Mormons I’ve ever met have been really nice people (even if your religion is pretty peculiar).

 

[RebeccaJ]

If a glass like material was known, it would not be hard to imagine that someone would get the idea of making something out of it to enclose a window type opening.

As far as Parker’s other points, just look at what critics have done with the word tapir. This is an unknown word and because of it, an unknown animal. I have seen critics mock this word. And yet, why would JS include it in the book, if not taken directly from a translation?

Imagine, yes, that is an appropriate word to use.

 

[why_me]

You did make this insinuation (among others) in this post

Well instead of looking at it negatively I was implying that other christians should desire that kind of life. Thus, the mormons are christian in their teachings. It is something they have in common with other christian faiths. Now, I also know that many faiths do not actively teach these principles or that many people ignore the teaching. But can other christians claim that that the lds are wrong and evil or strange?

 

[why_me]

Imagine, yes, that is an appropriate word to use.

Actaully rebecca, one can nitpick a word. But that doesn’t change the book of mormon and how it came about. Critics often isolate an issue. But when looked at holistically, from a whole, the book is hard to refute. Someone wrote the book. Who? So far, no one has proven that it was written by JS or Sidney Rigdon or anyone else. Nor have any of the original witnesses retracted their testimony. And that is the point.

It is quite unfair to isolate something from a whole. For example, the pope will visit Isreal today. Much controversy surrounds the pope that was pope during the holacust. Should we isolate that pope and claim: the catholic church is not true because that pope acted without love and charity? Should we isolate something else within the catholic faith to make a point about the entire faith? No. Looking at the lds faith holistically, it comes across as a beautiful faith with other sacred scripture designed to bring a person closer to god.

Critics on this forum do much to cast doubt. But to cast doubt about any religious faith is not hard to do. Faith and doubt go hand in hand and each compliment the other.

To isolate an issue is a great critic strategy but to look at something holistically, may just be a little difficult for a critic.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actaully rebecca, one can nitpick a word. But that doesn’t change the book of mormon and how it came about. Critics often isolate an issue. But when looked at holistically, from a whole, the book is hard to refute. Someone wrote the book. Who? So far, no one has proven that it was written by JS or Sidney Rigdon or anyone else. Nor have any of the original witnesses retracted their testimony. And that is the point.

I think we have hashed through this before in this forum and it is quite clear that the BoM is a work of man-made fiction.

It is quite unfair to isolate something from a whole. For example, the pope will visit Isreal today. Much controversy surrounds the pope that was pope during the holacust. Should we isolate that pope and claim: the catholic church is not true because that pope acted without love and charity? Should we isolate something else within the catholic faith to make a point about the entire faith? No. Looking at the lds faith holistically, it comes across as a beautiful faith with other sacred scripture designed to bring a person closer to god.

Yes, this would be the view of someone who holds nothing but admiration for the false teachings of a false church that comes from a false prophet.

Please stop comparing your heresy to the anti-Catholic propaganda you have going here. Really. You should stop pretending that you are Catholic.

Critics on this forum do much to cast doubt. But to cast doubt about any religious faith is not hard to do. Faith and doubt go hand in hand and each compliment the other.

To isolate an issue is a great critic strategy but to look at something holistically, may just be a little difficult for a critic.

It is not isolated whyme, it is the foundation of a great lie. It begins with Mormons isolating out the small grain of truth, that of Jesus Christ, and luring people into a great lie. Looking at Mormonism holistically, requires nothing less than to declare it as what it is. A deception. A perversion of truth that uses Our Lord as bait.

 

[why_me]

I think we have hashed through this before in this forum and it is quite clear that the BoM is a work of man-made fiction.

Yes, this would be the view of someone who holds nothing but admiration for the false teachings of a false church that comes from a false prophet.

Please stop comparing your heresy to the anti-Catholic propaganda you have going here. Really. You should stop pretending that you are Catholic.

It is not isolated whyme, it is the foundation of a great lie. It begins with Mormons isolating out the small grain of truth, that of Jesus Christ, and luring people into a great lie. Looking at Mormonism holistically, requires nothing less than to declare it as what it is. A deception. A perversion of truth that uses Our Lord as bait.

Thanks for your opinion. I hope that you are sharing your opinions with your mormon friends in Utah. You must be very popular.

However, are you sure that you are catholic?? In my The People’s Mass from yesterday it says: '‘To live as a member of the Church is to reproduce the love of Christ in our actions’. I need to be honest here. I have never seen this love in your posts. But I do unfortunately see something else.

 

[ParkerD]

Speaking of the Book of Mormon as a whole, what I never find when I read anyone’s debunking efforts about it is an explanation of the evident “authenticity” that I find in the writings: the idiomatic expressions, the diction, the flashbacks, the sincerity, the changes in writing styles from one author to another. Another “authenticity” I have found is that by using the Book of Mormon as a teaching source and a learning source for some 35 years or so, including expanded use of it more recently in my life, I have “tested” and “authenticated” the teachings (meaning those taught by the prophets who were teaching righteous ways of living).

All of the personal writings of Joseph Smith sound “authentic” to me, but they in no way compare with the Book of Mormon in modes of expression. A serious scholar would compare his letters and his other writings with the Book of Mormon for style, diction, even length of sentences.

One who looks at fiction as a genre finds many good writers. Joseph Conrad is a good writer, but “Heart of Darkness” is obviously a work of fiction in that there is no authenticity although in a good work of fiction, that is what the writer attempts to do by creating the “aura” of authenticity through various means. Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) was an author who did that well…

Shakespeare creates different “personas” in his characters who talk differently than each other, and he is brilliantly consistent as he develops those “personas” including their knowledge of life at court plus accurate use of different languages–and in fact, that is one of the reasons that a large number of people including Supreme Court Justice Stevens conclude that Shakespeare was a disguise name for the real author, whom they believe (and I concur) was the Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere. (There was a recent Wall Street Journal article about that, April 18, 2009.)

A debunker of the Book of Mormon can’t deal with the authenticity issue, so they ignore it altogether. Small wonder. That would be too deep for their thinking.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Thanks for your opinion. I hope that you are sharing your opinions with your mormon friends in Utah. You must be very popular.

However, are you sure that you are catholic?? In my The People’s Mass from yesterday it says: '‘To live as a member of the Church is to reproduce the love of Christ in our actions’. I need to be honest here. I have never seen this love in your posts. But I do unfortunately see something else.

Any you must be very popular with the Catholic nuns you hang out with. Do you tell them about all the Catholics who are drunk, who use their bodies for amusement and the Pope about whom have so many faults to point out?

I have noticed that you have taken up the hobby of “Judging Rebecca”. Perhaps you should spend that time on yourself.

 

[why_me]

Any you must be very popular with the Catholic nuns you hang out with. Do you tell them about all the Catholics who are drunk, who use their bodies for amusement and the Pope about whom have so many faults to point out?

I have noticed that you have taken up the hobby of “Judging Rebecca”. Perhaps you should spend that time on yourself.

I have spoken with the nuns about my mormon daughters and they have met them. No problem Just recently I showed them a picture of my daughter in front of the mormon temple and the only comment that was negative: Why me has a lovely daughter, too bad she is mormon. And I replied to the nun, she is lovely and has good values (they noticed) because she is mormon.

Yes, I have made a comment about the youth in our society abusing their bodies. They also have eyes. But they also know that mormons teach good values to their young. I have not pointed out any faults about the pope on this forum. He says wonderful things in the Vatican newspaper.

I just hope that he defends the Palestinians now that he is in Isreal and calls for a two state solution and a discontinueing of settlement expansion on the west bank by the Isrealis.

 

[Catholic20064]

I have spoken with the nuns about my mormon daughters and they have met them. No problem Just recently I showed them a picture of my daughter in front of the mormon temple and the only comment that was negative: Why me has a lovely daughter, too bad she is mormon. And I replied to the nun, she is lovely and has good values (they noticed) because she is mormon.

Yes, I have made a comment about the youth in our society abusing their bodies. They also have eyes. But they also know that mormons teach good values to their young. I have not pointed out any faults about the pope on this forum. He says wonderful things in the Vatican newspaper.

I just hope that he defends the Palestinians now that he is in Isreal and calls for a two state solution and a discontinueing of settlement expansion on the west bank by the Isrealis.

I’ve had many comments about the loveliness of my Mormon daughter as well and the compliments are well deserved. She’s a good kid and it is at least partly due to her being raised Mormon. Having written that it is also true that she seems to be unusual among the local Mormon girls who generally tend to eventually go the way of the world.

At the same time there are many wonderful girls I have noticed at my Catholic parish as well who keep Catholic standards of morality. And there are many young men who do the same. I can’t vouch for all of the “inactive” Catholics who show up only at Easter and Christmas nor can I vouch for all of the “inactive” Mormon kids I never see at church. It is very hard to generalize about these things.

 

[mormonpro]

Speaking of the Book of Mormon as a whole, what I never find when I read anyone’s debunking efforts about it is an explanation of the evident “authenticity” that I find in the writings: the idiomatic expressions, the diction, the flashbacks, the sincerity, the changes in writing styles from one author to another. Another “authenticity” I have found is that by using the Book of Mormon as a teaching source and a learning source for some 35 years or so, including expanded use of it more recently in my life, I have “tested” and “authenticated” the teachings (meaning those taught by the prophets who were teaching righteous ways of living).

(and I concur) was the Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere. (There was a recent Wall Street Journal article about that, April 18, 2009.)

A debunker of the Book of Mormon can’t deal with the authenticity issue, so they ignore it altogether. Small wonder. That would be too deep for their thinking.

mormonpro-Actually the real evidence suggests much of the Book of Mormon was copied from a couple of different writers books available at the time of Joseph Smith. B. H. Roberts, As a Historian and General Authority of the LDS Church, come to question the Book of Mormon. B. H. Roberts typewritten manuscript “Book of Mormon Difficulties” is over 400 pages long, in it he admitted that the Book of Mormon is in conflict with what is now known from 20th century archaeological investigation about the early inhabitants of America. After going into a lengthy explanation of impossibilities in the Book of Mormon he also says that he has come to discover things he didn’t know earlier in his life, for instance, that Joseph Smith did have access to a number of books that could have assisted him and given him ideas for the Book of Mormon.
Roberts then goes on to say that Joseph could have gotten his information from “knowledge” that existed in the community, because of the books like Ethan Smith’s “View of the Hebrews” (published nearby in 823) and Josiah Priest’s book, “The Wonders of Nature and Providence,” published only 20 miles away, about one year later. That book had lots to say about the Hebrew origin of American Indians and their advanced culture and civilization.
Also, It is obvious to any Bible Scholar that Joseph Smith heavily plagiarized the Bible often quoting word for word, once again from different books and authors. These factors easily account for the ‘changes in writing style’ and ‘learning source’ Parker speaks of. Now I will challenge Parkers honesty once again as I have in other posts that have proven him and Mormonism completely wrong… Below we look at a sample of how so-called ‘plain and precious things’ were added to the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible (also called by Mormons: “The Inspired Version”) however Joseph forgot to add the changes to the same verses in the Book of Mormon: (Smith put the so-called polluted teachings from the corrupted Bible, in the Book Of Mormon. To quote a few examples of his slip ups
Original (Smith claimed was flawed) Matt 6:38 : “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”
JST(Joseph Smith Translation) of Matt. 6:38 : “Wherefore, seek not the things of this world but seek ye first to build up the kingdom of God, and to establish his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you.”
3Nephi 13:33 : " But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you." (same as flawed)​

Original (flawed?)Matt 7:2,3 “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with that measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”
Jst Matt. 7:2,3 : “…Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged; but judge righteous judgment. for with what judgement ye shall judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”
3Nephi 14 1&2 : " Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (same as flawed?)​

Original (flawed) Matt: 6:9-15 “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.”
JST Matt.6:9-15 : “Therefore after this manner shall ye pray, saying. Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is done in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And suffer us not to be led into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever and ever, Amen.”
3Nephi 13:9-13 : “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.” Obviously Joseph copied parts of the Book of Mormon from the Bible and the reality that Joseph was a fraud is further proved by his failure to add the so-called “plain and precious parts” to his book of Mormon, instead he added what he called the corrupted parts to his BOM. To say the least Joseph was “uninspired” when he wrote the Book of Mormon… And is an easily proved fraud to any who take a closer look and are honest.