clarkkent14 wrote: BONUS: http://www.alliswellinzion.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; is available! Hurry and snatch it up
kathyn wrote:jo1954, I very much disagree that we can only receive milk in the Church. You constantly maintain that you are above the Church leaders in knowledge and enlightenment, that you are closer to Christ than they are. You seem to imply that you have ascended higher in the celestial realms than us ordinary Church members. In fact, your message seems to be that you don't even need the Church at all; that it's a useful tool for us lesser faithful souls. I don't worship the Church. I worship God the Father and Jesus Christ. I see membership in the Lord's true Church as necessary, not just a useful tool that can be discarded once it's usefulness is of no further value to you. The temple blessings are necessary, not just as nice symbols but as actual ordinances that will be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise when we are worthy. I do not believe that they can be skipped once you have gained further light and knowledge. They are eternal principles and promises. The Lord has always made covenants with his people. We are no different. They are acknowledged promises between God and us. If we keep our covenants, He will keep His promises to us.
The only possible candidate for the Anthon Transcript is the "Caractors" document which is of dubious origins and produces multiple problems if legitimate. It by no means has been "vindicated". One particular source of that rumor was based on a forged Anthon Transcript that Mark Hoffman (of Salamander Letters fame) produced. In any case this sort of assertion can end up hurting peoples faith down the road, even when well intentioned.p.s. as a final note, I bet you did not know that the characters Joseph copied for Martin harris to take to the professor actually themself were vindicated when much later almost identical 'word for word' characters were found guess where? SOUTH OF THE BORDER MY FRIENDS just where they should have been.
cayenne wrote:aussie, did you get my message above?
Hyrcanus wrote:I'd like to chime in on one other thing here. The echo chamber I mentioned earlier has a tendency to produce a large volume of "evidences" that aren't as sound as they claim to be. In many cases this is harmless, but when someone starts to doubt their faith, all of these little folk evidences that they have bought into over time come back and bite them. A good example from this thread:
The only possible candidate for the Anthon Transcript is the "Caractors" document which is of dubious origins and produces multiple problems if legitimate. It by no means has been "vindicated". One particular source of that rumor was based on a forged Anthon Transcript that Mark Hoffman (of Salamander Letters fame) produced. In any case this sort of assertion can end up hurting peoples faith down the road, even when well intentioned.p.s. as a final note, I bet you did not know that the characters Joseph copied for Martin harris to take to the professor actually themself were vindicated when much later almost identical 'word for word' characters were found guess where? SOUTH OF THE BORDER MY FRIENDS just where they should have been.
I just want to also say that I don't intend to pick on anyone, there have been at least a dozen examples of this sort of thing in the thread, I just picked the most recent one.
That isn't a reasonable representation of what was found in Mexico. Here is the background on the transcript itself, we aren't sure it is authentic:cayenne wrote:Hyrcanus wrote:I'd like to chime in on one other thing here. The echo chamber I mentioned earlier has a tendency to produce a large volume of "evidences" that aren't as sound as they claim to be. In many cases this is harmless, but when someone starts to doubt their faith, all of these little folk evidences that they have bought into over time come back and bite them. A good example from this thread:
The only possible candidate for the Anthon Transcript is the "Caractors" document which is of dubious origins and produces multiple problems if legitimate. It by no means has been "vindicated". One particular source of that rumor was based on a forged Anthon Transcript that Mark Hoffman (of Salamander Letters fame) produced. In any case this sort of assertion can end up hurting peoples faith down the road, even when well intentioned.p.s. as a final note, I bet you did not know that the characters Joseph copied for Martin harris to take to the professor actually themself were vindicated when much later almost identical 'word for word' characters were found guess where? SOUTH OF THE BORDER MY FRIENDS just where they should have been.
I just want to also say that I don't intend to pick on anyone, there have been at least a dozen examples of this sort of thing in the thread, I just picked the most recent one.
sorry, the evidence is available. Maybe you need the sources to go look it up yourself. i will be more than happy to give you all the sources one by one, and its a long list.
The anthon "caractors" has a nearly identical match in mexico found after the fact. That is a fact.
Why does it have to be a defense time after time.
?
Yes, conjecture. We don't have all the information, therefore any opinion is by definition conjecture. That doesn't mean it is completely invalid, just that we should exercise caution in advocating that opinion. I'm not trying to attack the integrity of the BoM, I'm only trying to point out that many of the evidences that get flung around are a little flimsier than they are represented to be.cayenne wrote:conjecture?
seriously? If you can show forth that Joseph and his supposedly "massive library" had access to characters such as the ones in Mexico which closely relate to the Anthon characters, then you have something on this single point of evidence. There are literally hundreds more.
This whole debate is because certain people believe Joseph used materials of his day to 'make it all up'
No, the mexican characters don't prove by them self that they match the characters on the plates, that is not the issue here. The issue is how did Joseph supposedly 'make up' characters that actually have matches/or near matches elsewhere NOT KNOWN IN HIS DAY
The anti's must show that Joseph had access to an amazing library of information in his day to make up a huge amount of material LATER shown to be valid. So far the anti's can't. They cannot come up with how Joseph nailed so much material unknown to him. Does that mean for sure Joseph got if from God, well maybe not, but it sure as hek proves he did not borrow it, or make it up. The information is real, and came from somewhere.
There are no antis on here.cayenne wrote:so let me get this straight to the anti's on here, you want to bring up 'evidence' to support fraud, and this evidence is limited. When i am giving a much greater evidence of things Joseph nailed correctly NOT KNOWN IN HIS DAY and now this evidence is being ridiculed?
you really want to know I can start you with dozens of sources.
cayenne wrote:
paanchi
pacumeni
pachus
funny names huh?
So, how is the Church doing as a result of choosing actions which are not the same actions which Christ exemplified? Are these actions bringing her closer to Christ? Are these actions even Christ-like?InfoWarrior82 wrote:Church leaders don't rebuke and excommunicate because they fear they might be "found out" and exposed as frauds and liars. It is done because the Lord's house is a house of order. You have it backwards, Jo. We do not dictate the will of the Lord. To use a military phrase: $(#&@ rolls downhill. If you really feel that the church needs to go in a new direction, by all means, do what you gotta do. Organize protests, write letters, start a speaking tour, etc. IF you are doing what the Lords wants, there is no doubt you will be fruitful and bring us all into a higher sphere! Maybe you can start a new re-reorganized LDS church and actually be the stone cut out of the mountain without hands! You go girl! :ymparty:jo1952 wrote: There is a difference between seeking for truth and asking questions vs pointing out that there are those among us who are hampering our ability to find and see what it is we are seeking. It still all comes down to only being able to see what we want to see; which turns out to limit what we are able to receive. For instance, the Church encourages our support of the Constitution, which includes freedom of speech. Yet the Church does not allow the free speech of her own members; free speech is punished when your speech includes daring to ask her questions about her own actions. She holds herself to a different set of standards than she holds the members. Christ's own actions were greater than the Church's actions. He forgave; even forgiving those who crucified Him. That is the example He set. We are supposed to be His church; why aren't we following His example?
Here on LDSFF, we are allowed to vent and ask questions not only about our leaders and the Church in general; we are also allowed to discuss uncorrelated guidance which the Holy Spirit is teaching us. THIS is the example Christ set. He questioned and even rebuked His religious leaders; while also exercising free speech...speaking about things Father was telling Him He could share, which were beyond what the leaders wanted Him to say. So, are the leaders following Christ's example in this? Or is this forum more in line with how Christ functioned in His method of teaching? Christ taught an extremely important lesson when He asked His apostles what THEY believed BEFORE He told them what He believed. When was the last time our leaders asked US what we believe? Instead, THEY are TELLING us what to believe; and it must be accordance with what they have correlated. We aren't allowed to believe anything other than what has become creedal. This is the very thing Joseph was told NOT to participate in.
Email Brian and ask him to remind you. Contrary to popular belief, mods do not have banning capability on the main forum - only Brian does. You were banned for breaking the rules that we all agree to abide by as members of this forum. As far as Aussie being warned - he has been. It's funny to me how every time someone gets warned or banned, they are SO worried about whether or not the other guy is being "punished"...... 8-|keep the faith wrote:Jules wrote: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. ;)keep the faith wrote:
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.
So enlighten everyone here Jules on why I did get banned. After responding to a very negative and attacking blog about the church and those called to preside over it by someone named Rock Waterman I was ushered to the door here by mods here who don't think its being nice to reply honestly to these incessant attacks aimed at the TCOJCOLDS that continue to this day. Yet someone like Aussie can come on this forum for 6 years and level one attack after another at the church and the Brethren and any posters who dare cross him and he is free to do so to his hearts content. Sure seems to be a double standard here in my book but obviously you see it differently. You always have. Just look at this thread. I never attacked Watermans diatribes against the church like Aussie is attacking posters here for believing in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I'm not bitter at all. Brians forum has in large part turned into a sounding board for all the disavowed and disillusioned out there who love to hate on the church and the Prophets. I told him that would happen if all the evil speaking of the Prophets and defaming accusations made against them and the church continued to be tolerated on the forum. I have tried over the years to give some balance and point out some of the errors in those harsh judgments made against the church by many here and those outside the forum. You can call that slander. I call it fairness.
Jesus had power over Satan, in this instance, when He, Christ, quoted scripture to Satan, and Satan eventually left disgruntled. This is the power offered us if we but feast upon the words of Christ. This gives us power to discern evil in its various forms. This is also why we must get to the point that Jesus can be in our countenances.natasha wrote:I still think that we are totally understimating the power that the adversary has....he rules here....and uses every trick he can to dissuade men from the truth. Don't you think he knew about the coming of the Book of Mormon? Don't you think he knew about Joseph Smith and what he would do for the world? Everyone is very quick to remember the powers that the Savior has....but I have always been taught that the adversary has very similar powers (conterfeit) but then, of course, the Savior has power over him.
I'd like to bring attention to something that covers a variety of misconceptions about the church. There is a rather good book entitled "Take Heed That Ye Be Not Deceived"RaVaN wrote:The thing that gets me on this the most is that it is completely based off of circumstantial evidence. Everything has to be just so in order for there to be any weight to the evidence and you have to BELIEVE things were just so in order to accept it. You have to suspend belief and reject all evidence to the contrary to believe the "Proof" here. It really is trust in the arm of flesh(and the arm specifically working against God) or trust in God.
Every single thing brought up by AussieOi has an answer. With every single "evidence" you are left with only two choices, Faith in God or faith in man. People have been gathering these "evidences" for almost 200 years now. Not one shred of hard evidence but plenty of just-so stories from those that seek the destruction of the Gospel truths. All of these accusations aren't even new, but are regurgitated up regularly every 20 years or so in a new package and they ALL have answers. You have to be LOOKING to disprove in order to accept these truths, or be not part of the Restoration and just blindly accepting what you are told.
I mean come on, God says this is true, you see people saying it's not true, and you accept what people have said rather than what God has said to you? Really? That speaks volumes.
Satan knows more than is given credit. Why else was he driven out of heaven and cast down to earth? He was in on the counsels in heaven from the beginning. He had to know all or he wouldn't know how to tempt us in every way possible. He wouldn't know how to twist truth around and make it appear evil. Yes, Satan knows a tremendous amount of ways to turn men away from God. He does it all the time. Isn't this why there is so much evil speaking of church leaders on this forum? Isn't this why people are allowed on this forum to cut down the church in so many ways? Satan knows every trick in the book, because he knows the truth of all things, yet he chose not to follow his Father's plan. He wanted all the glory for himself in making everyone come back to God. The war in heaven still rages here on earth. It is up to the righteous to seek God and His Christ, and their words for safety. Satan knows each of us and knows exactly what buttons to push to get any one of us to join him in his effort and goal to destroy the church and the people in it. Remember, we cannot serve both God and Mammon? We must choose one or the other, however, if we do not choose God...hell is the default setting.drjme wrote:I think you give him too much credit. Using this same logic you could say the same thing about the bible. Don't you think he knew Jesus was coming? Don't you think he knew about Jesus and what he would do for the world?natasha wrote:I still think that we are totally understimating the power that the adversary has....he rules here....and uses every trick he can to dissuade men from the truth. Don't you think he knew about the coming of the Book of Mormon? Don't you think he knew about Joseph Smith and what he would do for the world? Everyone is very quick to remember the powers that the Savior has....but I have always been taught that the adversary has very similar powers (conterfeit) but then, of course, the Savior has power over him.
If he knew what killing Jesus would do for he world he would have made sure no one lived who tried to kill Jesus. He does not know the future by his own powers, he does not comprehend the power and plans of God. He lives in reaction to them, not in anticipation of them. By this logic you can't even trust the written word of God.
So man can make an iPhone - using special stone (indium) that is transparent and touch sensitive to display the mysteries of the world, yet God can't do the same thing? He created the world. Is Steve Jobs greater than God? Half of the people viewing this forum use iPad's... their using stones bro. Indium is a special stone they go out of their way to mine for, just so they can make more iPad's. I can translate any language back and forth with almighty Google. God can't? Something to think about.Gone Fishing wrote:From Mormon apostle Russell Nelson's July 1993 Ensign magazine article, "A Treasured Testament" (about the BoM):
"Adapted from an address given 25 June 1992 at a seminar for new mission presidents, Missionary Training Center, Provo, Utah."
"Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.”
(Ref. http://www.lds.org/ensign/1993/07/a-tre ... t?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )
From the LDS Church's Friend magazine for children:
"Joseph also used an egg-shaped, brown rock for translating called a seer stone. The translating was done at Peter Whitmer’s home, a friend of the Prophet’s where Oliver Cowdery, Emma Smith (Joseph’s wife), one of the Whitmers, or Martin Harris wrote down the words spoken by the Prophet as soon as they were made known to him.
"Martin Harris said that on the seer stone 'sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by [the one writing them down] and when finished [that person] would say "written;" and if correctly written, the sentence would disappear and another take its place; but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates.'
"Even with the help of the Urim and Thummim and the seer stone, it wasn’t easy to translate the sacred record."
(Ref. http://www.lds.org/friend/1974/09/a-pea ... t?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )
http://shakenfaithsyndrome.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;About Shaken Faith Syndrome
In today’s Internet world, an increasing number of Latter-day Saints are encountering anti-Mormon material. Since most members don't have all the answers at their fingertips, LDS-critical claims can be unsettling or create doubt. Some arguments have caused a few members-even active members with strong testimonies-to lose their faith.
Backed by extensive research and decades of experience dealing with anti-Mormon allegations, Michael Ash explores how we can be both critical thinkers and devout believers.
Because misconceptions can make us vulnerable to a shaken faith, the first half of this book offers suggestions on how we can strengthen our intellectual foundations against challenging issues. Ash invites us to fortify our testimonies as we develop a more mature appreciation of the role of prophets and personal revelation, as well as a greater understanding of the inherent limitations of science, history, and even the scriptures. The second half of this book exposes common anti-LDS tactics and engages some of the most frequent criticisms.
