Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sorry, I didn’t realize from the thread title or the OP that the thread was limited to geographical and political evidence. I’ll drop it.
@Old-Timer, in the future, I think it’s better if you don’t comment on a topic immediately before closing it to discussion, as it sends a mixed message. Commenting on it or closing it is fine, but doing both in the same post is a bit irksome, particularly from a site admin. Just my opinion.Tobin wrote:
Megatherium wrote:Joseph didn’t actually use the plates in the translation process. There are numerous accounts of him translating with the plates in another room or otherwise not present, by means of a seer stone, but not a single one of him translating directly from the plates. If he didn’t need them to translate them, why we’re they even given to him at all?
Yes, that is very strange. So, either he made it up, or him having plates he couldn’t show anyone is rather pointless and cries out that God was testing him.
Exactly. This gets at the heart of why I can’t accept the traditional excuses for the plates’ absence. I can never accept a God who “tests” me by trying to fool me like that.
It’s like the kid in our deacons quorum who says that his mom told him God put dinosaur bones on earth “to fool the scientists”. WTF. That is a messed up way to think of God.
The absence of gold plates today and in church history runs contrary to my hope for what God is like. Wanting us to believe in the face of so much evidence to the contrary, while simultaneously removing the biggest piece of evidence makes God seem deceptive and even a little passive-aggressive. Moroni took the plates away. I was always embarrassed to tell this to investigators as a missionary.
Joseph didn’t actually use the plates in the translation process. There are numerous accounts of him translating with the plates in another room or otherwise not present, by means of a seer stone, but not a single one of him translating directly from the plates. If he didn’t need them to translate them, why we’re they even given to him at all?
We have the testimony of three witnesses, and of eight witnesses, but there are glaring problems with those for anyone who does an hour of research on Google on that topic.
If nobody saw them, and they weren’t used in translation, it seems more likely to me that the BoM is an impressive narrative, but not historical.
When I started disclosing my issues to girls I was dating early on, my dating experience improved quite a bit. It was not always well received, but it saved me a lot of time and heartache. Roadrunner wrote:he’d rather have a mission full of masturbating missionaries
Pretty sure that is what he’s got.
Satan is bound! It was an accident. Take these steps: – Pray, feel bad, etc. (Sounds like you’ve done this one already.)
– Pay on your most recent paycheck.
– Pay on your next paycheck when it comes.
– Stop feeling bad.
If the Book of Mormon is not historical but still “true” in a true principlessort of way, 1. What are the principles in it that are true?
2. Are these unique to the Book of Mormon?
3. Are there principles in it which are
nottrue?* 4. How worthwhile is it to read over and over, if it has bad principles as well as good principles?
5. How worthwhile is it to read over and over, when there are so many books in the world with true principles?
I’m not trying to be difficult; this is a real issue I am thinking about. Lately I have not been inclined to read the Book of Mormon again, but I am willing to be convinced.
*For example, Captain Moroni compelling people to go to war, “skins of blackness” related to wickedness, etc.Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
