LDS Freedom Forum

keep the faith wrote:

Gone Fishing wrote:Dang.
I was good even in 2007.
Proud of that post.
That's you, isnt it Mark.
I thought you got banned

I did. Defenders of the faith have a limited lifespan here. Anti's last forever. When are we going to disneyland together? I'll grab Shadow and you bring the Col along and we will rock the place. You buy lunch and the entrance tickets. Just use all that tithing money you now keep as excess stash. I'm too poor after paying The Lord my 10% along with all those other offerings.

OverwroughtIceChest wrote:

Gone Fishing wrote: This is DNA for words. They can now test these texts. Its like looking in a microscope and seeing the DNA and seeing who the parent is but pretending no, he's not that man's son or daughter.

We can't ignore this.

We can pretend the Abraham papyrus was forged or not his handwriting...but these books are there, they're legitimate, proven and verified

Actually, it's not DNA for words. It really isn't. You can't draw from what the Johnsons said that Joseph Smith had a copy of "Late War" and "Napoleon" at his elbow while composing (as opposed to translating) the Book of Mormon. If that were the case, surely someone who worked with him in the translation process would have said something. As far as I can remember, that has never been claimed by anyone.

I watched the entire video, I looked at the Johnsons' research and what I came away with was that this style of writing was part of the literary milieu of the early 1800s and that hadn't really been known before. We don't know (yet) how common this style of writing is, because the Johnsons are clear that they excluded documents under 15,000 words in length. This would exclude, for example, newspaper articles, and anyone who has looked at newspapers from the early 19th century is aware that papers included poetry and other things you'd not find in a 21st century newspaper. This is something that needs to be researched further. (I'm also thinking I heard the Johnsons say they didn't crunch all 100,000 books in their database, but only 5,000 works. I would have to go back and listen to that, but I'm nearly through knitting this sleeve--hooray!--so no opportunity to do that soon.)

Another thing I'd like to see is a "check" on the Johnsons' research for validity by repeating their algorithm on another author from the same period whose writings have been intensively studied. I'd probably select Jane Austen for that, she wrote several books during Joseph Smith's early life, I think we're pretty aware of what her literary influences were, and I know the English lit crowd just loves them some Jane to pieces. If something weird came up, like works that had not previously been identified as an influence on Austen, well, hopefully you can see where I'm going. Maybe the algorithm isn't all it's cracked up to be.

My concern is that you may be throwing away your faith on something that even the authors of the study aren't even claiming. I'd take a few steps back on this and take a few deep breaths.

Gone Fishing wrote:Yes but he said he watched the video so he must have seen that they specifically chose Jane Austin for just a comparison

I mean he couldn't have lied that he watched it and been _that_unlucky to be exposed like that could he?

hyloglyph wrote:This is bizarre haha

drjme wrote:I haven't watched the full presentation yet, will get to it tomorrow night.

I personally see the glaring simularities. like others said: you see what you want to see. when I was TBM I dismissed everything.
I justified the inconsistencies and cog dissed the rest.

Now I don't instantly dismiss anything. I don't fear questioning. God asks us to question. men say 'doubt your doubts.' in other words don't question. The father says otherwise. that is how we learn to trust Him. We watch for His hand to move and follow it. I'll post more over the next few days.

AussieOi = Gone Fishing writes: In both cases, in the space of a few verses, the commonalities are (1) a host of bad guys comes to war against the (2) good guys in a fort. The good guys are (3) prepared, the good guys (4) slaughter the bad guys, whose bodies (5) fill up the ditch around the fort, and the surviving bad guys (6) flee into the forest/wilderness.

See Alma 49:20-25 and Late War Chapter XXIX verses 20-23.

If Joseph Smith didn't pull from Late War, would you expect to see similarities such as this?

Gone Fishing wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm done.

someone else's turn.

My brain is shouting at me..."are they really this dumb or are the incapable of processing this"?

Maybe you have snorted so much Snuffer you have made Joseph Smith into your god and he is all perfect again and this threatens that paradigm.

I'm done.

someone else turn.

kill the thread. 99% of you are lying to yourselves. Clearly its going nowhere, and explains why it feels like mental castration when I go to church on Sundays.

gonefishing/AussieOi: this ain't a forum, its not even a campfire with smores and warm milk.

its embarrassing

keep the faith wrote:Otherwise good luck with those altruistic thoughts of yours. Rock on.

Gone Fishing wrote: My brain is shouting at me..."are they really this dumb or are the incapable of processing this"?

Maybe you have snorted so much Snuffer you have made Joseph Smith into your god and he is all perfect again and this threatens that paradigm.

Gone Fishing wrote:

Thomas wrote:I guess Joseph Smith must have been the only one in the world that owned that book because no one noticed.

I find is fascinating how now the only refute of one its existence and 2 its content is "I doubt he would have even read it....prove to me he read it".


Yeah, shelves breaking it would appear

Hell, I worship with Brethren worshippers week in and week out which takes a lot more charity than this.

3Nephi 27
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my gospel; and ye know the things that ye must do in my church; for the works which ye have seen me do that shall ye also do; for that which ye have seen me do even that shall ye do;

22 Therefore, if ye do these things blessed are ye, for ye shall be lifted up at the last day.

Jules wrote:

keep the faith wrote:

Gone Fishing wrote:Dang.
I was good even in 2007.
Proud of that post.
That's you, isnt it Mark.
I thought you got banned

I did. Defenders of the faith have a limited lifespan here. Anti's last forever. When are we going to disneyland together? I'll grab Shadow and you bring the Col along and we will rock the place. You buy lunch and the entrance tickets. Just use all that tithing money you now keep as excess stash. I'm too poor after paying The Lord my 10% along with all those other offerings.

That's not why you were banned Mark, and what you said there is untrue. Please don't be bitter and slander Brian and the mods. ;)

Thomas wrote:

Gone Fishing wrote:

Thomas wrote:I guess Joseph Smith must have been the only one in the world that owned that book because no one noticed.

I find is fascinating how now the only refute of one its existence and 2 its content is "I doubt he would have even read it....prove to me he read it".


Yeah, shelves breaking it would appear

The Book of Mormon was spread far and wide. It would only take one person owning the book, to make what you call the obvious connection that Joseph used the book as the basis for the Book of Mormon. Anti- Mormonism is as old as the Book of Mormon. The antis would have seized on this in a heartbeat and distributed the information to the world. That is where this story becomes a little fishy. How is it none noticed till now?

You are not giving this issue an unbiased evaluation. You are looking for reasons for the Book of Mormon to not be true so you are holding the evidence for and against to different standards. Taking any evidence against at face value without giving it the same critical review as you do to the Book of Mormon. You accuse us of not using our brains but I think you have not thought this one out. It is beyond strange that no one noticed until now. In fact, it is unbelievable, which really calls the evidence into question.

kathyn wrote:Natasha and Keep the Faith, count me in your corner. I have been dismayed by all the negative criticism of the Church and the Brethren, since I hold them in high regard. Freedom of speech is one thing, but much has been blatantly anti-LDS and I don't know why it's tolerated; yet if we try to respond, we are called on the carpet for it...because it's "unkind'. Really??? How is it kind to keep mocking those of us who are faithful followers of Christ and the Church?

It's time more of us stood up for the Church and the Brethren, and quit being uber-critical of them. it's just causing a great divide among us. It's great to ask honest questions, but lately there are more and more accusations and they are not honest ones. They are an attempt to bring down the Church and I vehemently resist that.