LDS: Jesus is the "son" of God?

[BDawg]

The very Man who " translated" the ancient gold tabs. ( " translate= look at unknown language and put it in a language peolpe can read") Well it would seem logical to me that if and when he performed this " translation " that the gold bars ( that had the ancient language written on them ) WOULD ATLEAST BE IN THE SAME ROOM as JS and the scribes. IF not, then what was JS " translating FROM???

Hi Carl,

So what you’re saying is that YOU have a clear idea of how gold plates delivered by an angel ought to have been miraculously translated, and since the contemporary descriptions of that translation process don’t match up with your expectations, you reject the whole thing? Personally, I don’t have so much experience with miraculous translations, so maybe my expectations aren’t so precise.

You mentioned that there is ample historical evidence that Jesus lived, etc., even though the story sounds nuts. Well, I assert that there is ample historical evidence for the proposition that there were REAL GOLD PLATES.

For an introduction to the witnesses who saw/felt, the plates, see:

jefflindsay.com/BOMIntro.shtml#6

It also has links to other online material that addresses criticisms of the witnesses’ testimony.

And even though people laughed at the idea of ancient writings on gold plates, it turns out that now we know that this was a fairly common practice in the ancient world. See the material at the following URLs.

jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml#metal
jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml#bury

So whether you still find the story to sound whacky, or not, it sounds considerably less whacky now than it did in 1830.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

The source of the literature is God. It came by revelation from God. What makes it so hard for you to believe that God should speak from heaven and give us scripture and revelation as He used to through His prophets in ancient times?

The birth and origin of the Book of Mormon is from God. The Book of Mormon is a book of scripture and the sacred record of the former inhabitants of the American continent, who were a branch of the house of Israel. They had prophets and holy men among them who preserved their sacred history and teachings, complied (or abridged) in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon was written on gold plates by their last prophets, to come forth in the latter days by the power of God. Joseph Smith was chosen as an instrument in the hand of God to bring them forth in the latter days. He was visited by angels who delivered him the plates, and he translated them from an unknown tongue into English by the gift and power of God. Why is that such a hard thing for you to believe?

Have you actually read the Book of Mormon and prayed about it, and try to understand it? Don’t you think that your judgment of it would be premature until you did that?

The Catholic Church is an ancient and respected institution. The “foundation or the base” of it was originally the gospel, and the Apostolic authority of Peter, and Paul, and John, and other Apostles who founded it; and for that alone it deserves our respect. However, unfortunately that authority was eventually lost through the Apostasy of the early Christian church; which is why it had to be Restored by revelation and ministration of angels through the Prophet Joseph Smith in our time. That authority and “foundation” or “base” now rests with the LDS Church, not the Catholic Church.

The “source” of those beliefs and literature is as solid as you can get. They are based on the revelations of Jesus Christ to Joseph Smith and his successors in the day and age in which we live.

zerinus

Hello Zerinus,

Your replies emply that the BoM ( birth, origin , etc ) are from God and were written in this ancient language on gold bars and that God used JS to " translate" this to us ( his people )

Allow me to ask ( are the following an accurate part of the Morman history ??)

1. Were the gold bars NOT present when JS " translated them " ( If not then what was the purpose of the gold bars
2. Did he NOT use the " secret glasses" when " translating " ( if not did he ever use them
3. Did he use a sear stone ( found on a seperate dig ) on a later date
4. Did he " translate" from the bottom of a hat with new sear stone. ( seems very confusing if you hold God to be in the driver’s seat
5. Dis JS have a history with " hat and stones " before BoM ( fortune telling to people)

If any of the above questions have even a partial truth, then I could not imagine God ( who directed this ) having such confusion over these divine revelations.

with respect,
God bless,
Carl

 

[BDawg]

1. Were the gold bars NOT present when JS " translated them " ( If not then what was the purpose of the gold bars.

Sometimes they were, sometimes they weren’t, according to the witnesses.

1. Did he NOT use the " secret glasses" when " translating " ( if not did he ever use them

I don’t know about “secret glasses,” whatever that is, but he did have a “Urim and Thummim,” like the priests in the Old Testament. They were sort of used like spectacles.

1. Did he use a sear stone ( found on a seperate dig ) on a later date

It was a “seer” stone. I guess if you heated it up a bit, it might be a “sear” stone, though.

1. Did he " translate" from the bottom of a hat with new sear stone. ( seems very confusing if you hold God to be in the driver’s seat

It was the same seer stone.

1. Dis JS have a history with " hat and stones " before BoM ( fortune telling to people)

He never did “fortune telling,” to my knowledge. He did, however, use his stone to help people find lost objects, and he was hired on to help a guy search for buried treasure in the area.

I know all that sounds weird, again, Carl. It even sounds weird to me. But I find that a great cure for the feeling that my religion is weird is to read the Bible. For instance, did you know that the patriarch Joseph (son of Jacob) had a special cup that he would use for divining? (See Genesis 44:5.) And did you know that some Old Testament scholars (not Mormons) believe the Urim and Thummim the Israelite priests had were stones used for divining?

And then there was the time the prophet Elisha called down she-bears from the hills to take out a bunch of teenagers who were teasing him for being bald… No, I’m not kidding. See 2 Kings 2.

Have you ever read the Old Testament straight through, before?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Sometimes they were, sometimes they weren’t, according to the witnesses.

I don’t know about “secret glasses,” whatever that is, but he did have a “Urim and Thummim,” like the priests in the Old Testament. They were sort of used like spectacles.

It was a “seer” stone. I guess if you heated it up a bit, it might be a “sear” stone, though.

It was the same seer stone.

He never did “fortune telling,” to my knowledge. He did, however, use his stone to help people find lost objects, and he was hired on to help a guy search for buried treasure in the area.

I know all that sounds weird, again, Carl. It even sounds weird to me. But I find that a great cure for the feeling that my religion is weird is to read the Bible. For instance, did you know that the patriarch Joseph (son of Jacob) had a special cup that he would use for divining? (See Genesis 44:5.) And did you know that some Old Testament scholars (not Mormons) believe the Urim and Thummim the Israelite priests had were stones used for divining?

And then there was the time the prophet Elisha called down she-bears from the hills to take out a bunch of teenagers who were teasing him for being bald… No, I’m not kidding. See 2 Kings 2.

Have you ever read the Old Testament straight through, before?

Under the New Law all divination is forbidden because, placed on a higher plane than under the Old Dispensation we are taught not to be solicitous for the morrow (Matthew 6:34), but to trust Him perfectly Who numbers the very hairs of our heads (Matthew 10:30). In divination, apart from the fraud and endless deception the predictions were generally as vague and as worthless as modern fortune-telling, and the general result then as now favored vice and injured virtue.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

Hi Carl,

So what you’re saying is that YOU have a clear idea of how gold plates delivered by an angel ought to have been miraculously translated, and since the contemporary descriptions of that translation process don’t match up with your expectations, you reject the whole thing? Personally, I don’t have so much experience with miraculous translations, so maybe my expectations aren’t so precise.

You mentioned that there is ample historical evidence that Jesus lived, etc., even though the story sounds nuts. Well, I assert that there is ample historical evidence for the proposition that there were REAL GOLD PLATES.

For an introduction to the witnesses who saw/felt, the plates, see:

jefflindsay.com/BOMIntro.shtml#6

It also has links to other online material that addresses criticisms of the witnesses’ testimony.

And even though people laughed at the idea of ancient writings on gold plates, it turns out that now we know that this was a fairly common practice in the ancient world. See the material at the following URLs.

jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml#metal
jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml#bury

So whether you still find the story to sound whacky, or not, it sounds considerably less whacky now than it did in 1830.

Hello again BDawg,

In awarness of my " questiong and skeptisism of the faith that you hold precious and true " I do amire the light you shine in regard to the ( again ) way and warmth you comment back. ( I am not sure I could or would do the same if the roles were reversed ) I
appreciate and admire that.

Look BDawg, I can not say " without question " I reject the whole thing. If that were truly the case, I would not be here on this site and certainly do not get joy by " judging " " evaluating" or " questioning" the very belefs you and others hold.

I am ( believe it or not ) TRYING to get perspective. ( maybe that is selfish and selfserving ) but it is true.

As far as I having a clear idea of how the plates " should " have been translated ( as if to say that this miracle and angels NEED to satisfy ME and pass MY criteria ) would certainly be raising me to a level wich I DO NOT CLAIM and further openly and freely confess my low level rank as a fellow human created by ALMIGHTY GOD.

I do appreciate the links you have provided and will check them out. I will add that my goal in checking them out is to try and gain perspective and understanding ( as to my fellow chritian brethran )
and NOT TO emply MY WAY or no way.

God bless ( thanks again for the links )
Carl

 

[RebeccaJ]

Be aware the Jeff Lindsay employs many red herrings and makes illogical connections.

For instance, writing on metal plates was not common, it was expensive. Most writing of the time and place of the BoM was done on papyrus, or clay tablets.

Also, there are no instances of pre-Columbian metal writings of any kind found in the Americas. Not to mention no contemporary writings to the BoM. No other writing of its kind, on metal or any other substance, exists. That is what happens when a language exists only in the imagination of a fiction writer.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

Sometimes they were, sometimes they weren’t, according to the witnesses.

I don’t know about “secret glasses,” whatever that is, but he did have a “Urim and Thummim,” like the priests in the Old Testament. They were sort of used like spectacles.

Thanks, But did he ever use them ???

It was a “seer” stone. I guess if you heated it up a bit, it might be a “sear” stone, though.

LOL ( I told you I was trying to learn )

It was the same seer stone.

He never did “fortune telling,” to my knowledge. He did, however, use his stone to help people find lost objects, and he was hired on to help a guy search for buried treasure in the area.

thanks again ( was this use of his stone " before " the BoM??

Have you ever read the Old Testament straight through, before?

I openly ( and not proudly ) reply no ( not straight through )

 

[BDawg]

He said he used the Urim and Thummim.

thanks again ( was this use of his stone " before " the BoM??

Yes. He doesn’t seem to have used it much (or at all) afterward. Mormons typically think of this in the following way. Joseph Smith was brought up in the American frontier, where folk magic and the like was very common, and wasn’t considered antithetical to Christianity. At the same time, many of the more educated Protestant ministers at the time bought into the “Enlightenment” idea that all miracles had ceased after the Apostles. (Catholics have a problem with this idea, as well as Mormons.) Joseph Smith’s involvement in folk magic probably prepared him for the idea that God could still work miracles, give revelations, etc. So whether it was all perfectly kosher, or not, God bent the situation to his own purposes.

Catholics often make an analogous argument. That is, people like Jehovah’s Witnesses will make a big deal about how the Catholics would take over pagan festivals, etc., and “Christianize” them. That’s why Christmas is at the same time as the old Winter Solstice festival, Easter involves eggs and bunnies, etc. But Catholics will argue that, even if the originals weren’t right on the mark, they successfully bent what was already there toward a wholly Christian meaning.

I openly ( and not proudly ) reply no ( not straight through )

Well if you decide to, prepare for some shocks!

 

[BDawg]

Be aware the Jeff Lindsay employs many red herrings and makes illogical connections.

Which connections are illogical?

For instance, writing on metal plates was not common, it was expensive. Most writing of the time and place of the BoM was done on papyrus, or clay tablets.

When did Jeff (or any Mormon) claim that it was common? The only writing on metal plates mentioned in the Book of Mormon was reserved for extremely valuable records. Seems to me that you are the one with logic problems.

Also, there are no instances of pre-Columbian metal writings of any kind found in the Americas. Not to mention no contemporary writings to the BoM. No other writing of its kind, on metal or any other substance, exists. That is what happens when a language exists only in the imagination of a fiction writer.

Well, as you said, it was never common. However, the Book of Mormon story began in the Middle East, and now we find a number of examples of important records being inscribed on metal plates in that area. Maybe some will turn up in Mesoamerica, as well, but if it wasn’t common there, either, and since the Spaniards melted down every bit of metal they could get their hands on and burned scads of Mesoamerican books, I’m not holding my breath.

You seem to be confused here, Rebecca. Jeff’s logic is fine. If he hasn’t amassed enough evidence to satisfy you on this question, that’s fine, but it has nothing to do with the “logic” of the point.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Carl can read Lindsay’s convoluted arguments and decide for himself.

BDawg: “When did Jeff (or any Mormon) claim that it was common?”

BDawg: “And even though people laughed at the idea of ancient writings on gold plates, it turns out that now we know that this was a fairly common practice in the ancient world.”

 

[excaliber]

The easiest way to tell if a so-called religion is a cult or not is by asking them two questions. 1) Do they believe that Jesus Christ is God? 2)Do they believe in the Trinity of God?

Only Catholics and Protestants believe the above. The reason why cults only say Jesus is the Son of God is because they will not allow the Holy Spirit to reveal the “True God” to them because then they would have to give up their power and authority and give it to Him. By denying the diety of Jesus Christ they enable themselses to keep control over their followers because it is person man, not the person of the Holy Spirit that they truly believe in.

Joe

Very true!!! The Jw’s substitute Jesus Christ…for “THE ORGANIZATION”. or man.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Well, as you said, it was never common. However, the Book of Mormon story began in the Middle East, and now we find a number of examples of important records being inscribed on metal plates in that area.

The BoM story is about Jews who migrated to the Americas. They had a culture, history, writings AND a religion which are described in the BoM. None of which are found anywhere in the Americas.

The Spaniards did not melt down everything. Many artifacts are still found, but the fact remains, there are no writings that match to so-called “reformed Egyptian”. In the old world, there are many thousands of contemporary writings to the Bible, in the languages the Gospels were written. None, at all, to support the BoM.

You seem to be confused here, Rebecca. Jeff’s logic is fine. If he hasn’t amassed enough evidence to satisfy you on this question, that’s fine, but it has nothing to do with the “logic” of the point.

Your attempts at obfuscation are not to be labeled as my confusion. Jeff’s “logic” is flawed, mainly by the red herrings he uses and the amazing leaps, like the one we just discussed. Just because something is found in the old world, that is not proof for its existence in the new. Time and culture are relevant as well. An Etruscan of the 9th century BC is not an Israelite of the 5th century BC. There are 10,000 examples of Etruscan writings, NONE, of “reformed Egyptian”. Logical enough for you?

 

[wmscott]

Hi Dubya,

It seems like a legitimate thing to say, from your point of view. CD said he wanted to start another thread about the LDS concept of the nature of God. Do you want to join us there?

I will keep my eyes open to it

 

[PaulDupre]

I don’t know about “secret glasses,” whatever that is, but he did have a “Urim and Thummim,” like the priests in the Old Testament. They were sort of used like spectacles.

And did you know that some Old Testament scholars (not Mormons) believe the Urim and Thummim the Israelite priests had were stones used for divining?

BDawg,

What you’ll find is that non-Mormon scholars think that urim and thummim were small stones used for casting lots (which is a form of divining). “Urim” and “thummim” are thought to be derived from Hebrew words meaning “cursed” and “faultless”. They are thought to be small, smooth light- and dark-colored stones. The stones would be placed into a pouch, then the diviner would ask a yes/no question (or perhaps either/or) and pull a stone from the pouch. A white stone means yes and a black stone means no (or white = 1st option, black = 2nd option).

This seems to be what was going on in 1 Sam 14:41-42, where the urim and thummim were used to ferret out a guilty man through successive yes/no divinations that split the crowd into two groups until the guilty man (Saul’s son Jonathan) was revealed. It is similar to b-tree logic used in computer databases (sorry, I’m a computer geek).

Your post seemed to imply that that some non-Mormon scholars believe the urim and thummim to be seer stones a la Joseph Smith spectacles. Is that really what you intended to convey? If so, I would like to see citations for it.

Paul

 

[zerinus]

Allow me to ask ( are the following an accurate part of the Morman history ??)

1. Were the gold bars NOT present when JS " translated them " ( If not then what was the purpose of the gold bars
2. Did he NOT use the " secret glasses" when " translating " ( if not did he ever use them
3. Did he use a sear stone ( found on a seperate dig ) on a later date
4. Did he " translate" from the bottom of a hat with new sear stone. ( seems very confusing if you hold God to be in the driver’s seat
5. Dis JS have a history with " hat and stones " before BoM ( fortune telling to people)

If any of the above questions have even a partial truth, then I could not imagine God ( who directed this ) having such confusion over these divine revelations.

You have copied those points from anti-Mormon websites. If I wanted to learn the truth of Catholicism, I would try to obtain it from faithful and informed Catholics, not from anti-Catholic websites. Those points you have mentioned contain some truth mixed with error; and it is not really worth my while to try to address them in detail one by one. If you think that anti-Mormon websites are the way to go, then there is not a lot that I could do to help you out. I could also present you a list such as the following:

1. 
   *]Did Moses lift up his magic rod, and plague Egypt with frogs, flies, lice, and bloody waters?
   *]Did he strike the Red Sea with his magic rod, and divided it in half to the Israelites could cross on dry ground; while the Egyptians who followed were all drowned?
   *]Did he go to the top of mountain to talk with God, and came down with the Ten Commandments written by the figure of God in tables of stone?
   *]Did the Israelites march around the city of Jericho seven times, blowing trumpets and shouting like mad men until the walls of the city fell down?
   *]Did Jesus die, and was buried in a sepulture; and afterwards came out of His grave and started walking about like the Dracula?
   
   If any of the above have a partial truth, then I could not imagine a God who does such wacky stuff!
   
   You are basically trying to tell God how to perform His miracles. I don’t think that is a wise thing to do if you are trying to discover the truth. If you want to know the truth of Mormonism, the first thing that you need to do is to stop trying to find the answer from anti-Mormon websites—and stop heeding anti-Mormons here who would PM you with links to anti-Mormon websites. I know that is what they like to do. That is the first step. The next step is to seek to obtain your information about Mormonism from informed and knowledgeable and committed Mormons; and the advice that they would give you is to read the Book of Mormon and try to find the truth of it for yourself. There is promise attached to the Book of Mormon that if you read it with sincerity of heart, with a genuine desire to know the truth, and pray about it God will manifest the truth of it to you by the power of the Holy Ghost. Here is the quote:
   
   Moroni 10:
   
   3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
   
   4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
   
   5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
   
   6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.
   
   7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.
   
   That is the promise that comes with the Book of Mormon. The truth of Mormonism is ultimately known by revelation, not by information. You can obtain that revelation by following the procedure outlined above.
   
   zerinus

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

You have copied those points from anti-Mormon websites. If I wanted to learn the truth of Catholicism, I would try to obtain it from faithful and informed Catholics, not from anti-Catholic websites. Those points you have mentioned contain some truth mixed with error; and it is not really worth my while to try to address them in detail one by one. If you think that anti-Mormon websites are the way to go, then there is not a lot that I could do to help you out. I could also present you a list such as the following:

1. 
   *]Did Moses lift up his magic rod, and plague Egypt with frogs, flies, lice, and bloody waters?
   *]Did he strike the Red Sea with his magic rod, and divided it in half to the Israelites could cross on dry ground; while the Egyptians who followed were all drowned?
   *]Did he go to the top of mountain to talk with God, and came down with the Ten Commandments written by the figure of God in tables of stone?
   *]Did the Israelites march around the city of Jericho seven times, blowing trumpets and shouting like mad men until the walls of the city fell down?
   *]Did Jesus die, and was buried in a sepulture; and afterwards came out of His grave and started walking about like the Dracula?
   
   If any of the above have a partial truth, then I could not imagine a God who does such wacky stuff!
   
   You are basically trying to tell God how to perform His miracles. I don’t think that is a wise thing to do if you are trying to discover the truth. If you want to know the truth of Mormonism, the first thing that you need to do is to stop trying to find the answer from anti-Mormon websites—and stop heeding anti-Mormons here who would PM you with links to anti-Mormon websites. I know that is what they like to do. That is the first step. The next step is to seek to obtain your information about Mormonism from informed and knowledgeable and committed Mormons; and the advice that they would give you is to read the Book of Mormon and try to find the truth of it for yourself. There is promise attached to the Book of Mormon that if you read it with sincerity of heart, with a genuine desire to know the truth, and pray about it God will manifest the truth of it to you by the power of the Holy Ghost. Here is the quote:
   
   Moroni 10:
   
   3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
   
   4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
   
   5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
   
   6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.
   
   7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.
   
   That is the promise that comes with the Book of Mormon. The truth of Mormonism is ultimately known by revelation, not by information. You can obtain that revelation by following the procedure outlined above.
   
   zerinus

1. 
   Hello Z,
   
   Relax my new friend,
   
   I will reply to your accusations of " antiMorman PM’S with a simple , not true.
   
   I will also reply to your " stop getting all your info from antiMormon sites with a simple, This site is the only one I am engaged in so ???
   
   If it is not worth your time to respond, THEN DON"T, however when you RESPOND IN PART , that makes me wonder???
   
   Having said that, I was not trying to raise your blood pressure,
   I ( very new to this enviornment ) am very curious.
   
   Peace,
   Carl

 

[zerinus]

Having said that, I was not trying to raise your blood pressure,

It looks like I have raised your blood pressure! Be assured that that was not my intention.

zerinus

 

[BDawg]

Carl can read Lindsay’s convoluted arguments and decide for himself.

BDawg: “When did Jeff (or any Mormon) claim that it was common?”

BDawg: “And even though people laughed at the idea of ancient writings on gold plates, it turns out that now we know that this was a fairly common practice in the ancient world.”

Hi Rebecca,

I’m sorry. You’re right that my statement could have been misleading. I meant that it has been found in lots of different places in the ancient world, especially the Middle East. So it was common, geographically speaking, but there was never anyplace where it was extensively practiced. That’s why scholars didn’t know about it until long after JS published the Book of Mormon.

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

It looks like I have raised your blood pressure! Be assured that that was not my intention.

zerinus

Hello again Z,

I think I may have found something that we CAN agree on

My intention for being here does not seem genuine to you.

Your intention for being here does not seem genuine to me.

Maybe a starting point of common ground??

God bless,
Carl

 

[BDawg]

Your post seemed to imply that that some non-Mormon scholars believe the urim and thummim to be seer stones a la Joseph Smith spectacles. Is that really what you intended to convey? If so, I would like to see citations for it.

Hi Paul,

Here’s a link to an article where I got my info. It references to non-LDS scholars.

There really isn’t that much info in the Bible about them, but it is pretty clear that 1) they were stones, and 2) they were used for some kind of divination or revelation.

The interpretation you mentioned is a pretty common one, from which the two scholars mentioned in that article deviate.