Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32007 comments on the CNN story from Oct 12, 2011, titled Who says Mormons aren't Christians?. In it, CNN reports that:

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

BeckerBob

Scranton, PA

#13928 Aug 22, 2012
what Marie explained I'm shocked that someone able to profit $4171 in 4 weeks on the internet. did you look at this link http://goo.gl/UUZFR

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13929 Aug 22, 2012
*if the Bible is wrong...

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13930 Aug 22, 2012
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
If you really believe that, why are you Mormon? Because if the Bible is, certainly Mormonism is all wrong. Justify yourself.
WHY do you think you have the right to demand ANYONE justify to YOU?

Do you think you are God or something?

That is just tacky and tasteless.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13931 Aug 22, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
See, when you accuse anyone of something you have no proof of to use to prove your accuization, you're resorting to being an ignorant, pathetic, moronic excuse for a human.
You're inability to see the forest because of the trees makes you one. And if you wish to get petty, it's spelled "accusation" not "accuization". How civil this conversation stays will depend on you. Keep it up and I'll be glad to go back to abusing you, which seems to put your panties in a wad.
Mormon historians don't agree with you and never will. They have ideas and that is as they state them to be polite and articulate in their writings.
Well, B.H. Roberts disagrees with you. And he was the first LDS historian. Thomas Ferguson disagrees with you. That's two. So that is twice you're wrong.
Show me a Mormon historian that says they have proof of source(s) Smith used (beside the Bible) and I'll show you a liar. There are no known sources for where Smith got inspiration from to write the BOM.
Plain ole common sense tells anyone who thinks that he wouldn't have done an comparison between the BoM and TVoH if he didn't think Joseph Smith hadn't read it.
The reason there are no known sources is because Smith and others who said they were witnesses of where the info came from, claimed he was reading from gold plates. None of them ever claimed he was reading from any other source of information while telling them what to write. They never claimed he had a pile of books or manuscripts he'd had put together earlier from books to read from.
Don't know your story of the translation very well, do you? There was always a sheet between him and whoever wrote down what he dictated. And you have no clue what he was reading to use as a source before the scribes got there.

From a Mormon source:
"The translation process that these witnesses observed was an open one—that is, others in the room could observe the dictation from Joseph Smith to the scribe. But early on in the translation, from late 1827 to early 1828, it appears that Joseph used a different process while translating. During this early period, Joseph would first copy some of the characters directly from the plates onto sheets of paper, from which sheets he would then translate his transcribed characters into English by means of the Urim and Thummim. During such a process, the plates were uncovered while Joseph translated (or at least while he copied the characters from the plates to paper); and since no one was permitted to see the plates until later, Joseph took precautions to prevent anyone from seeing him working directly with the plates. Martin Harris, in a couple of early statements, said that a blanket or curtain separated Joseph from him at the time he (Martin) obtained a sample transcript and translation to take to Professor Anthon in New York City."

You don't know what he was really reading from during that period.

To be continued...

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13932 Aug 22, 2012
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
///Thomas Ferguson disagrees with you....
liar liar pants on fire!

a Sister from my ward knew him had a book written by him autographed by him...

don't be a fool... you are being seen!

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13933 Aug 22, 2012
http://www.xpeditionsmagazine.com/magazine/ca...

Egyptian Artifacts in the Grand Canyon
The Phoenix Gazette - April 5, 1909

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13934 Aug 22, 2012
idk about the truth of that article... but anyone interest please follow up

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13935 Aug 22, 2012
But the scholars try to claim he did most of the translating this way:
"During the translation process, the witnesses were able to observe, in an open setting, the following:

"•Joseph Smith placing the interpreters (either the Urim and Thummim or the seer stone) in a hat and placing his face into the hat;

"•Joseph dictating for long periods of time without reference to any books, papers, manuscripts, or even the plates themselves;

"•Joseph spelling out unfamiliar Book of Mormon names;

"•after each dictated sequence, the scribe reading back to Joseph what was written so that Joseph could check the correctness of the manuscript;

"•Joseph starting a dictation session without prompting from the scribe about where the previous session had ended."

Source: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/...

The problems with this? If he could have done the translation this way all along, why did he even need the golden plates? According to the pro-LDS scholars, he wasn't using them. He certainly couldn't fit the golden plates in his hat. He could certainly think about what he was going to say before the scribing began and just made it up as he when along. He could also have hidden pages of the Bible he wanted to copy in his hat and read from it. Heck, he could have had some passages memorized. You certainly can't claim he didn't study the Bible. There are certainly mistakes enough in the BoM to suggest it. Jesus speaks Greek and French to a people who never had heard it, especially French since it wasn't even created yet. He has his own version of Noah and the Ark, he has people being called "Christian" before Christ was even born(way stupid, as Christ comes from the Greek also), and it does read like some illiterate person made it up as they went along. Boats with holes in top and bottom? I wouldn't ever take a ride in such a boat. A person who has trouble breathing after his head is chopped off? DUH! "It came to pass" in just about every verse? The fact he tried to make sound like the KJV of the Bible when the people were no longer talking in that manner? It's a crock! Not even a good one.
Thus according to your theory of his having got his information from "other sources" it would set him with a gift of remembering everything he read. With that gift according to your theory, he read everyone eles's works, rememberer everthing anyone had said of natives be ing Hebrews,
Straw man arguments again. I never claimed he remember everything in TVoH. But the basic themes aren't that hard to remember.
then forged a stack of gold plated plates he let some see and heft. Then behind his curtain he'd pretend to read from the gold plated plates.
I'll deal more with that aspect in another post.
But according to your theory what he was really doing, was pulling all he'd memorized from his mind and constructed one of the most perfectly made up fictional stories that any one had accomplished for thousands of years, all by his mighty mind of memory.
Sorry, but many of those stories are far from "perfect". Many, and I do mean many, are very similar to those in the Bible. And yes he could have been reading from anything behind those curtains.
And then after all that fine memorizing, he couldn't remember to keep the first vision correct each and every time...lol.
That is because he was making that up as he went along also. He just kept adding to it as he went along. Polishing it til he got what he finally wanted it to say. What's even funnier is what Smith changed after he published the BoM. There are many things in it that don't agree with current LDS teachings. More proof he was just making it up all along.
As I tell you over and over, you don't think about what you say when you say it and it's far reaching complications.
Apparently, neither do you.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13936 Aug 22, 2012
piratefighting wrote:
<quoted text>
liar liar pants on fire!
a Sister from my ward knew him had a book written by him autographed by him...
don't be a fool... you are being seen!
He did publish this:

"Having spent a considerable portion of the past ten years functioning as a scientist dealing with New World archaeology, I find that nothing in so-called Book of Mormon archaeology materially affects my religious commitment one way or the other, and I do not see that the archaeological myths so common in our proselytizing program enhance the process of true conversion....

"The first myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists. Titles on books full of archaeological half-truths, dilettanti on the peripheries of American archaeology calling themselves Book of Mormon archaeologists regardless of their education, and a Department of Archaeology at BYU devoted to the production of Book of Mormon archaeologists do not insure that Book of Mormon archaeology really exists. If one is to study Book of Mormon archaeology, then one must have a corpus of data with which to deal. We do not. The Book of Mormon is really there so one can have Book of Mormon studies, and archaeology is really there so one can study archaeology, but the two are not wed. At least they are not wed in reality since no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem then that a concentration an geography should be the first order of business, but we have already seen that twenty years of such an approach has left us empty-handed." (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1969, pp. 76-78)

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13937 Aug 22, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't disagree. And I won't justify what I wrote. But if you were to go back for a dozen pages and read Dana's posts, you would see the words ignorant, pathetic and mormonic describe his frame of mind at times quite nicely.
And "a**hole" also perfectly describes you many times. But you don't seem to appreciate either when I use it. In fact, you cry in your Mormon "Near Beer". And again, as for my being ignorant, I don't spell it "mormonic" when I mean "moronic". You just insulted the "Mormons".

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13938 Aug 22, 2012
piratefighting wrote:
http://www.xpeditionsmagazine. com/magazine/canyon/canyon.htm l
Egyptian Artifacts in the Grand Canyon
The Phoenix Gazette - April 5, 1909
Let us know when they find "Reformed Egyptian there. And Lehi? He was Jewish, not Egyptian.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13939 Aug 22, 2012
piratefighting wrote:
<quoted text>
WHY do you think you have the right to demand ANYONE justify to YOU?
Do you think you are God or something?
That is just tacky and tasteless.
Will you get over it?
pearl

Draper, UT

#13940 Aug 22, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
See, when you accuse anyone of something you have no proof of to use to prove your accuization, you're resorting to being an ignorant, pathetic, moronic excuse for a human.
Mormon historians don't agree with you and never will. They have ideas and that is as they state them to be polite and articulate in their writings.
Show me a Mormon historian that says they have proof of source(s) Smith used (beside the Bible) and I'll show you a liar. There are no known sources for where Smith got inspiration from to write the BOM.
The reason there are no known sources is because Smith and others who said they were witnesses of where the info came from, claimed he was reading from gold plates. None of them ever claimed he was reading from any other source of information while telling them what to write. They never claimed he had a pile of books or manuscripts he'd had put together earlier from books to read from.
Thus according to your theory of his having got his information from "other sources" it would set him with a gift of remembering everything he read. With that gift according to your theory, he read everyone eles's works, rememberer everthing anyone had said of natives be ing Hebrews, then forged a stack of gold plated plates he let some see and heft. Then behind his curtain he'd pretend to read from the gold plated plates. But according to your theory what he was really doing, was pulling all he'd memorized from his mind and constructed one of the most perfectly made up fictional stories that any one had accomplished for thousands of years, all by his mighty mind of memory.
And then after all that fine memorizing, he couldn't remember to keep the first vision correct each and every time...lol.
As I tell you over and over, you don't think about what you say when you say it and it's far reaching complications.
This scenerio is more believable than the prophet line.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13941 Aug 23, 2012
A bad day Smith Translating:

Alma 23:
16 And now it came to pass that the king and those who were converted were desirous that they might have a name, that thereby they might be distinguished from their brethren; therefore the king consulted with Aaron and many of their priests, concerning the name that they should take upon them, that they might be distinguished.

17 And it came to pass that they called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites.

18 And they began to be a very aindustrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephites; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them.

Alma 24:
1 And it came to pass that the Amalekites and the Amulonites and the Lamanites who were in the land of aAmulon, and also in the land of bHelam, and who were in the land of cJerusalem, and in fine, in all the land round about, who had not been converted and had not taken upon them the name of dAnti-Nephi-Lehi, were stirred up by the Amalekites and by the Amulonites to anger against their brethren.

2 And their hatred became exceedingly sore against them, even insomuch that they began to rebel against their king, insomuch that they would not that he should be their king; therefore, they took up arms against the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi.

3 Now the king conferred the kingdom upon his son, and he called his name Anti-Nephi-Lehi.

The king called his son "Anti-Nephi-Lehi". Why would they be "Anti-Nephi-Lehi's" if they were friendly with the Nephites? How are they "Anti" and pro Nephites at the same time?

Nooooo, Joseph Smith couldn't have made that up.

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13942 Aug 23, 2012
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Will you get over it?
Nope, I don't think I will. Stop whining... cry baby!

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13943 Aug 23, 2012
Fact is...

mrs dane roberts

addresses factual information (so he implies), that can't be factual because it's obtained from:

1) non official Mormon sites...

2) ex-communicated Mormons... because of inappropriate or unauthorized abuses...

3) copy-paste opinions (that he doesn't even read)

---he debates "Mormonism" on these evidences...

---plays bait and hook games to attack people or send them on erroneous missions that he never addresses, nor intends to address...

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13944 Aug 23, 2012
---mrs dane roberts is a fraud who has demonstarted over and over his true intentions...

---it's impractical to even fathom any logical factual thoughts flowing out of his mouth...

---HE HAS PROVEN THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN...

---Always:
.fetishing peoples underclothes,
.using filthy vulgarity,
.endless turning of every possible moment of life into perverted, and hate filled, twisted, rambling...

---Never:
.addressing people respectfully… like he had truth on his side,

---Logical? or, Pathetic? You decide.

He is here out of vengence and spite...
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to embrace fantasies just to please a phony religion that only wants to run every detail of my life without giving me anything in return. Sorry, that's not going to happen.
No response to the rest. It was just all BS.

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13945 Aug 23, 2012
mrs dane roberts...

You remind me of Cain... so jealous of his brother Able that he killed him.

YOU have a hidden agenda.

You are here to cause as much chaos as you can and be as destructive as you can because you were jealous that you didn't have what you felt was important to you from the Church.

You personally stated this...
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to embrace fantasies just to please a phony religion that only wants to run every detail of my life without giving me anything in return. Sorry, that's not going to happen.
No response to the rest. It was just all BS.

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13946 Aug 23, 2012
The Bible also testifies of Jospeh Smith,
Isaiah 29:11-12
Malachi 3:1
Ezekiel 37:16-20

YOU can't fraudulantly deny the artifacts... the evidence in Meso-America...

So you never address it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_pyramid

DENY THAT... LOOK AT THE SIMULARITIES IN THE STEPS OF THE PYRAMIDS...

https://www.google.com/search...

hmmm...

YOU CAN'T Snap your fingers and make them disappear...

ADDRESS the facts...

ADDRESS the scriptions testifying of Joseph Smith...

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13947 Aug 23, 2012
TheSanduskyDoctrine wrote:
<quoted text>
///
Your histrionic 'may' and 'coulda' VAPORIZED
WHEN YOU DIDN'T PRODUCE A SINGLE SWORN STATEMENT FROM ANYONE SAYING JOSEPH SMITH SPENT HIS TIME TEACHING HIMSELF FULL LITERACY.

You IGNORANT HICK,

YOU ALREADY SHOT YOUR BEFUDDLE-BOAT IN HALF WHEN YOU WENT TO GREAT PAINS EXPLAINING HOW SMITH WAS ALWAYS BUSY HERE, THERE, WORKING FOR PEOPLE TRYING TO FIND LOST ESTATES AND TREASURE where THEY THOUGHT MEN had BURIED IT.

You CAN ONLY OBJECT a CERTAIN NUMBER of TIMES BEFORE YOUR OBJECTIONS BEGIN TO CONFLICT IN E.V.E.R.Y. MAJOR PARTICULAR.

HE CAN'T have HAD ACCESS to the BOOKS in a CHARACTER SUCH AS HIS LIFE, and NO ONE TESTIFY THEY KNEW IT.

Your WITCHCRAFT COMPETENCY FORENSICS bore even the SOPHOMORIC.

You're a queer, you got caught molesting.

You're out.

Whatever happens to you I fully endorse and I know several people who personally feel the same way. Those little boys were innocent and YOU - not Joseph Smith or your wife, YOU did what you did to them,

and you're not getting back in.

End of story until they catch you in whatever church you've moved on to "teach" in.
WOW

TheSanduskyDoctrine Dude said a mouthful of truth!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News End of Boy Scouts' ban on gays prompts elation ... 58 min VeganTiger 126
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 1 hr tongangodz 7,208
News Mormons keep affiliation with Boy Scouts despit... Thu tongangodz 2
News VANCOUVER MORMON TEMPLE: LDS Church opens templ... (Apr '10) Thu hello 19
News Mormons keep affiliation with Boy Scouts despit... Aug 26 Marcavage s Trick 1
News Rumors of Mormon Wars (Jan '13) Aug 26 Rupert P Jigglybo... 14
News Now they t ell us: Mormon church says bishop ac... (Apr '09) Aug 25 Joe Smith 7
More from around the web