The word "Mormon" is a turn off.

[notsmart]

What if I found a church based on homicidal rage, but we do charity on the weekends? Is that also good?

While I think you are reffering to a controversial shoot out, I am not sure you really believe that Joseph Smith based the LDS church on that event- right?

So I’ll pretend I did not see that implication and move to the second part of your post- is that also good?

I think both Mormons and Catholics know the importance of works which glorify God. I am thankful to any religious organization that practices acts of kindness and offers help in times of trials, because no matter how much I may dissagree with some or most their doctrines, I am not blind to the things that are being done that shine more light into darkness. If I cant see Jesus in everyone, Jesus may not see me, or much in me either.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The word mormon brings to mind people who value family, and who have been very helpful to those hit by disasters. Why not focus on good things, because there will always be differences of beliefs out there.

This comes across as “programming” language.

The house is on fire!

Mormons: the house isn’t on fire, it is just the warmth of God, which we all know is good

 

[notsmart]

This comes across as “programming” language.

The house is on fire!

Mormons: the house isn’t on fire, it is just the warmth of God, which we all know is good

Hi, I am not a mormon. I dont know what you mean by the house is on fire either?

 

[JohnVIII]

Seems Joseph Smith said some pretty bad things himself, putting himself above Jesus Christ. I’ve never seen the Holy Father say anything near this.

The statue on top of many Mormon churches and said today it be Angel Moroni, who in Mormon scripture is supposed to be the son of Mormon. However, originally the statue was meant to be the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith; as Brigham Young taught that no man may enter in to heaven without the permission of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

 

[CentralFLJames]

The statue on top of many Mormon churches and said today it be Angel Moroni, who in Mormon scripture is supposed to be the son of Mormon. However, originally the statue was meant to be the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith; as Brigham Young taught that no man may enter in to heaven without the permission of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

I just bet ya that the pigeons who white-wash that statue daily don’t give a hoot if its Joseph or Moroni just as long as it doesn’t suddenly come crashing down to earth to disturb the inspiration as well as the view.

James

 

[Paul_G]

The statue on top of many Mormon churches and said today it be Angel Moroni, who in Mormon scripture is supposed to be the son of Mormon. However, originally the statue was meant to be the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith; as Brigham Young taught that no man may enter in to heaven without the permission of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

This is an interesting bit of history, could you point out to us where you gained this information about a Joseph Smith statue instead of a Moroni statue being initially planned for the temple. I don’t think I have ever come across this before, although I have encountered your second point many times.

Paul

 

[notsmart]

I just bet ya that the pigeons who white-wash that statue daily don’t give a hoot if its Joseph or Moroni just as long as it doesn’t suddenly come crashing down to earth to disturb the inspiration as well as the view.

James

Tread very very carefully when making statements like this, unless you would like someone to say the same about Mary or the Cross.

 

[Paul_G]

I just bet ya that the pigeons who white-wash that statue daily don’t give a hoot if its Joseph or Moroni just as long as it doesn’t suddenly come crashing down to earth to disturb the inspiration as well as the view.

James

I agree, I’m sure they don’t, in fact they along with seagulls, in my opinion, are most unbiased and non-denominational of all the birds, willing to share their gifts equally amongst us all.

Paul

 

[notsmart]

I agree, I’m sure they don’t, in fact they along with seagulls, in my opinion, are most unbiased and non-denominational of all the birds, willing to share their gifts equally amongst us all.

Paul

You said it better than I did. But, we said the same thing.

Its amazing what kind of things I am seeing on this thread.

 

[CentralFLJames]

There is actually a third possibility on who that statue is supposed to be. Smith provided two conflicting identifications for the angel who appeared to him in 1823 and directed him to the golden plates. The first name Smith provided for this angel was Moroni. This is recorded in Cowdery’s history of Joseph Smith in which he identified the angel as the prophet Moroni from the Book of Mormon (Cowdery 1835, p. 112). In July 1838, Smith wrote an article for the church periodical Elders’ Journal, in the form of questions and answers, that stated t " Moroni, is the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated…"

However, on May 2, 1838, a few months before Smith’s statement in Elders’ Journal, Smith began dictating a church history that included a detailed account of his visits from the angel (Smith 1838a, p. 7). Smith identified the angel as “Nephi”, which is the name of the Book of Mormon’s first narrator (Smith 1838a, p. 5). Smith’s 1838 identification as “Nephi” was repeated when the 1838 history was published in 1842 in Times and Seasons, which Smith edited himself (Smith 1842, p. 753), and in Millennial Star (Pratt 1842, p. 53).

More here: Angel Moroni

So it seems Mr. Smith even confused himself about who the angel was - Moroni or Nephi. Is it any wonder that somwhere along the line Smith, or one of his loyal followers might have confused Smith for Moroni or Nephi?

So much for the bright and clear illumination of the so called “Angel of Light”.

James

 

[Paul_G]

There is actually a third possibility on who that statue is supposed to be. Smith provided two conflicting identifications for the angel who appeared to him in 1823 and directed him to the golden plates. The first name Smith provided for this angel was Moroni. This is recorded in Cowdery’s history of Joseph Smith in which he identified the angel as the prophet Moroni from the Book of Mormon (Cowdery 1835, p. 112). In July 1838, Smith wrote an article for the church periodical Elders’ Journal, in the form of questions and answers, that stated t " Moroni, is the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated…"

However, on May 2, 1838, a few months before Smith’s statement in Elders’ Journal, Smith began dictating a church history that included a detailed account of his visits from the angel (Smith 1838a, p. 7). Smith identified the angel as “Nephi”, which is the name of the Book of Mormon’s first narrator (Smith 1838a, p. 5). Smith’s 1838 identification as “Nephi” was repeated when the 1838 history was published in 1842 in Times and Seasons, which Smith edited himself (Smith 1842, p. 753), and in Millennial Star (Pratt 1842, p. 53).

More here: Angel Moroni

So it seems Mr. Smith even confused himself about who the angel was - Moroni or Nephi. Is it any wonder that somwhere along the line Smith, or one of his loyal followers might have confused Smith for Moroni or Nephi?

So much for the bright and clear illumination of the so called “Angel of Light”.

James

I know this takes the fun out of it, but this substitution of Nephi’s name for Moroni’s name is due to a single error in the coping of a manuscript not a confusion on the Part of Joseph Smith as to who the angel was.

Paul

 

[CentralFLJames]

I know this takes the fun out of it, but this substitution of Nephi’s name for Moroni’s name is due to a single error in the coping of a manuscript not a confusion on the Part of Joseph Smith as to who the angel was.

Paul

hmmm, that does kind of take the fun out of it. Kind of sloppy for a man who proof reads all his own works and who is supposed to be delivering humanity the errata to correct the errors of the Christians dont-cha think?

At least he didn’t lose these manuscripts like he lost the first revelation (his translator wife stole or misplaced ) that he could not reproduce verbatim from those magical golden plates.

James

 

[Paul_G]

hmmm, that does kind of take the fun out of it. Kind of sloppy for a man who proof reads all his own works and who is supposed to be delivering humanity the errata to correct the errors of the Christians dont-cha think?

These documents were complied and copied after His death. Although this miscopied word was reprinted in a few other publications they all stemmed from this one error. Are you aware that there are some writings that support the Moroni version prior to the compilation of Joseph Smiths annals into a collection?

We have one misplaced word vs. many citations to the contrary, so each one will have to decide for themselves which is the more reasonable answer, Nephi or Moroni?

At least he didn’t lose these manuscripts like he lost the first revelation (his translator wife stole or misplaced ) that he could not reproduce verbatim from those magical golden plates.

James

Not to put to fine a point on it, and for the purpose of information, it wasn’t Joseph’s wife it was Martin Harris’s wife who did the loosen. As far as the missing text goes, Joseph Smith never said that he couldn’t reproduce it. He said that if he did it was quite likely that his enemies, which likely had possession of them, would change the text themselves and use the discrepancy against him.

Paul

 

[CentralFLJames]

Not to put to fine a point on it, and for the purpose of information, it wasn’t Joseph’s wife it was Martin Harris’s wife who did the loosen. As far as the missing text goes, Joseph Smith never said that he couldn’t reproduce it. He said that if he did it was quite likely that his enemies, which likely had possession of them, would change the text themselves and use the discrepancy against him.

Paul

I know it was Harris’ wife. I guess I didn’t say it clearly. She thought her husband was being duped by a whack-job and wanted to prove to her husband that Smith was a fraud if he could not reproduce the exact same manuscript.

But how convenient for Smith to worry that his enemies would posses magic white out that would make the original manuscript appear different than a 2nd re-revealed copy. Smith knew he was caught and simply invented a new book so he could escape the very very clever Mrs. Harris’ scheme to prove him a fraud with his own words. She knew Smith could not reproduce an exact copy of the manuscript and knew that there was no magical golden plates that he always hid inside his hat when he read them.

If the gold plates were real in the manner Smith alleges the very heavy weight of gold plates (gold would have weighted about 140 lbs) of the dimensions conveyed would have tore a hole in the bottom of his hat and landed on the floor where all could see them. As it was the only thing anyone ever saw was Smith talking into his hat as he allegedly read the plates. No one credible, certainly no one independent and unbiased, ever saw those golden plates except Smith. Again how convenient to the story. And again how convenient for the golden plates to later go missing…

More here: Golden Plates

James

 

[ronald_g_w]

I know this is your belief, and I respect that.

From a Catholic POV, this is problematic for two reasons. First, we believe that an answer to a personal prayer is a personal answer. Second, there are no witnesses to Smith’s claims, so it is unverifiable.

That doesn’t necessarily mean Smith didn’t have this vision. However, if he really did have this vision, it was personal to him. An answer only meant for Smith, not to the world as a whole.

Outside of that, I am of the opinion that he was only exposed to the religions that were prominent in his area, which were all, Protestant. I don’t believe he was ever exposed to Catholicism, in a fashion that was not tainted with the extreme anti-Catholic rhetoric of the period and place in which he lived. There is nothing in any of his writings that indicate he ever sought out the Catholic Church. He did, at one time, join up with the Methodists, and he was raised non-denominational (most likely Unitarian or Universalist).

Surely the personages he claimed to have seen in that vision would have been well aquainted with the Catholic Church and pointed him in that direction dont you think ?

 

[why_me]

I know it was Harris’ wife. I guess I didn’t say it clearly. She thought her husband was being duped by a whack-job and wanted to prove to her husband that Smith was a fraud if he could not reproduce the exact same manuscript.

But how convenient for Smith to worry that his enemies would posses magic white out that would make the original manuscript appear different than a 2nd re-revealed copy. Smith knew he was caught and simply invented a new book so he could escape the very very clever Mrs. Harris’ scheme to prove him a fraud with his own words. She knew Smith could not reproduce an exact copy of the manuscript and knew that there was no magical golden plates that he always hid inside his hat when he read them.

James

I think that you are missing something. First, the pages that were lost were copied by a scribe. That means that someone was copying the words as Smith would read them. That would mean that if JS wrote the book of mormon he would still have the original manucript. And so, the fear that Harris’ wife or her cohorts would alter the text would be very real.

 

[why_me]

Mentioning Richard Dawkins is not the best thing to do. He has been responsible with his book The God Delusion in leading out of many people from christian faiths in general. Dawkins is more of a ‘threat’ than mormonism because he writes in simple prose about the negatives of religions which can be understood by many.

 

[CentralFLJames]

I think that you are missing something. First, the pages that were lost were copied by a scribe. That means that someone was copying the words as Smith would read them. That would mean that if JS wrote the book of mormon he would still have the original manucript. And so, the fear that Harris’ wife or her cohorts would alter the text would be very real.

I don’t think I am missing anything.
Let’s not forget that the original copy of JSs words if you believe that there really were plates would have had to have been very clean - perhaps with zero scratch outs, cross troughs and blot outs. After all, as “the story” goes JS was here to rescue us from the errors of Christianity and all the errors in the bible that were corrupted over the years right? So that first copy (let’s call it “the original”) would have been flawless or very near so. The scribe was simply a man who was writing verbatim as Smith, with his face in his hat was reading the magical glowing plates. All he had to do was write and perhaps dip his quill in the ink well now and then. So unless JS was stuttering and changing his words as he read the plates that original would be ultra clean - but let’s give him a few blotch outs and strike throughs. There would have been no substantive insertion of new sentence or entire new concepts above the words since there is no thinking or change of thought - its pure translation.

OK now fast forward in time. The clever Mrs. Harris probably alarmed that her husband, Smith’s scribe, is spending all his time in the service of Smith and coming home late at night with all these wild stories of magic plates and divine revelation. She thinks something like ‘whoa, good Lord, my man is being duped; he is no longer making money for the family and he sounds like he is in the service of the devil himself trying to replace Jesus!’. So she argues with her husband to stop the nonsense but he shows her the manuscripts. Mrs. Harris reads them then sees right through the nonsense and devises a plan - she will hide the originals (perhaps with the concurrence of her husband) and see if ol’ Joe Smith can replicate the same exact words - afterall he has the magic plates that can repeat exactly what it did before.

OK, so Smith sees he is caught and is furious. He knows he is a good story teller but not so good that he can say exactly the same thing he said before from the short hand notes from the invented script he had hid in his hat and was reading from previously. So he invents a worry that his new revelation will become corrupted by men. Funny how a prophet who can see do far into the future was so careless to let the originals out of his sight in the first place to set up this entire laughable scenario. Mrs. Harris must have been giddy with laughter imagining ol’ Joe Smith’s delimma.

If Smith’s so called “enemies” wanted to discredit him by changing the manuscript then the original would have had to be substantially altered. Not just a few words here and there. It would have required the deletion of entire sentences and rearranging of paragraphs and many new words. There was no “white out” in those days and edits and revisions would have been extremely easy to see. There would have been new sentences put in over above the old ones and new writing in the margins. And it would have been done in a different hand than Mr. Harris unless Smith considered he was an enemy too and in on it. But if that was the case why did Joseph Smith invite Mr. Harris back to write the next version? The answer is Smith trusted Mr. Harris as being completely duped - he just didn’t trust his clever wife. At any rate this paranoia of Smith’s is clearly a canard. It would have been extremely simple to prove that a modification by his enemies was bogus by comparing the physical writings with the replacement text Smith could have reproduced from the plates. The revisions would have been extremely obvious. Even if the pages were simply deleted there would have been missing sentences and punctuation across the page breaks etc. Even if his “enemies” hired a new scribe to take the substance of what Smith wrote and re-penned it from scratch onto new paper in a professional and clean fresh “new” copy with edits it would have been very clear that it was in a new hand writing style, it was in a different ink and it used a different literary style. Further Mr. Harris could have attested that it was not what he originally wrote (assuming he was not an enemy too). Remember Smith’s enemies would not want to change it much since they would want the evidence that proved it was linked to Smith - a new document or substantive change would have taken away that linkage to his scribe. No - they wanted it to look as close as possible to original with only a few key words changed to embarass Smith. But edits would be obvious.

Bottom line - Smith pulled off one of the biggest con jobs in history with the weakest of stories and with perhaps the most gullible people ever before seen in history.

James

 

[AMDGtoo]

Surely the personages he claimed to have seen in that vision would have been well aquainted with the Catholic Church and pointed him in that direction dont you think ?

Actually we have no idea what was said–or even asked–(and it seems that JS wasn’t all that sure since he claimed several versions). The point though was that whatever, it was personal and private revelation is just that–it is not something that can be added to the revelation that ended after the last Apostle which we know was already delivered.

 

[ronald_g_w]

Actually we have no idea what was said–or even asked–(and it seems that JS wasn’t all that sure since he claimed several versions). The point though was that whatever, it was personal and private revelation is just that–it is not something that can be added to the revelation that ended after the last Apostle which we know was already delivered.

Are you telling me that revelations from God have stopped and the last one was given with the original Apostles.