why me;6739244:
UHHHH…ughhhh, no. You will need to read what the clerk wrote. Joseph described what the book was and who authored the book. But the law at that time did not provide copyright to translators. Thus, he needed to declare authorship. But as to who wrote the book…he was honest if the person is mormon and he lied if the person is catholic.
But that has nothing to do with why he is the declared author and proprietor.
Actually, it was twopekinguys who derailed the thread and he can either be catholic or protestant depending on who posted that post. Perhaps it was the protestant twopekinguy who derailed the thread but it could have also been the catholic twopekinguy who derailed the thread. You can PM him to verify which one it was.Tom, you let these guys de-rail the thread. Forget about the copyright issue, give it to them, it doesn’t matter. Ask them to at least address the original argument with the greek letters “alpha” and “omega” being used and the word “adieu” being used. Otherwise you will be arguing about something that doesn’t matter. I don’t mean to generalize but to be honest the LDS tend to de-rail threads they cannot address.
For me, they always speak with the same voice. With the help of the 11 witnesses who testified that they saw the plates and felt the plates and turned the leaves of metal over, if they were the eight witnesses.
and Oh…then there was sidney. Since you started a previous thread that he could have written the book of mormon we will need to include him too. So ol’ joe had to split the profit 13 ways…Actually tom, the word adieu was rather common back then in the USA.
SirThomasMore;6739442:
UHHHH…ughhhh, no. You will need to read what the clerk wrote. Joseph described what the book was and who authored the book. But the law at that time did not provide copyright to translators. Thus, he needed to declare authorship. But as to who wrote the book…he was honest if the person is mormon and he lied if the person is catholic.
Only a Mormon would say that telling someone you wrote the book when you only translated it was not a lie.
With the help of the 11 witnesses
Well, according to Joe, they were 11 liars…shall we believe Joe or not?
who testified that they saw the plates and felt the plates and turned the leaves of metal over, if they were the eight witnesses.
And who, as it has been shown, were liars, and of whom it was later said they only saw with “spiritual eyes”
So ol’ joe had to spilt the profit 12 ways.
There you go with that pesky eye problem again…it comes from seeing things that aren’t there. I did not say he was a smart when he lied…but he DID lie in order to be able to sell books
(Edited) A word allegedly being common in the US means nothing. The issue is whether Joe, an uneducated country boy used it commonly. I have read his diary. he did not use it commonly. Nice try. Anything else I can correct for you?Actually tom, the word adieu was rather common back then in the USA.
Adieu is an English word
There is a common misunderstanding among some critics of the Book of Mormon that the word adieu is not an English word. This is not true. The problem stems from the fact that adieu is both an English word and a French word, and most English speakers are more familiar with its use in a French context.
Adieu is a perfectly good English word that has appeared in English dictionaries, English literature, and in common English usage from long before Joseph Smith to the present. Adieu entered the English language in the 14th century. It entered from Middle French, not modern French, and it has been part of English for approximately 800 years. Adieu has been part of the English language longer than the word banquet, which is also a word in modern French, but banquet entered the English language only in the 15th century. Adieu is no less English than commence, nation, psychology, Bible, vision, or any other word that can be traced back to Latin, Greek, German, French, Spanish, or any other language.
The presence of adieu is no more a challenge to the historicity and authenticity of the Book of Mormon than the 36 uses of banquet in the NIV is a challenge to the historicity and authenticity of the Bible.
en.fairmormon.org/%22Adieu%22_in_the_Book_of_Mormon
Any other problems I can solve for you?
We have to admit, that the majority of the time we have you on ignore. Your post proves why.Actually, it was twopekinguys who derailed the thread and he can either be catholic or protestant depending on who posted that post. Perhaps it was the protestant twopekinguy who derailed the thread but it could have also been the catholic twopekinguy who derailed the thread. You can PM him to verify which one it was.
But the momons did not derail the thread. They are just defending what they consider sacred and you can not blame them for that.
Copyright shlopyright. People have always put the author’s name and the translator’s name. The KJV, being in English, did not require a translator.
Very interesting.
To your first point, the BOM was written in the fictional language “Reformed Egyptian.” Since Smith clearly connected the Meso-American ruins with BOM cities, it makes sense that we’d find some evidence that the BOM was accurate if such things happened there, right?
That’s one of my first questions on those rare occasions when Mormons come to my door. I can access the Old and New Testaments in their original languages; show me the original languages of the BoM.
And when they talk about the “burning in the bosom” that lets them know what is right, I confess that I get a burning in my bosom occasionally, but Gaviscon or Pepto-Bismal takes care of it right away.
I used to take it at face value, but when I checked into it, the LDS are correct; that’s the way the law was written at the time.
I wholly agree and since we know that the BOM is a literal translation and that Smith didn’t use any of his own language or ideas in it according to apostle Russel M. Nelson and David Whitmer, the mistakes in the text must have been those of God, right?
I had to look at those again.
Same for “It isn’t doctrine unless a prophet says 'thus saith the Lord”’.
Many people have had a witness from the holy ghost that the book of mormon is true. Thus, they become mormons. It is not nonsense for mormons. In fact it is quite a bold claim to make inside a book that if one prays about it, the Holy Ghost will testify as to its truthfulness.
You will need to contact the NY court at that time that required Joseph to claim authorship even though he clearly stated who the author was. My guess is simple: The law, which definitely did not recognize the lds church nor the book of mormon, would not accept Mormon being the author of the book of mormon. Thus, Joseph became the author.
