The fight over Book of Mormon geography

Yes he was...

Interesting fact, no?

“Since over 20% is directly copied from the bible - scribal errors and all.”

I think this simple fact - errors were copied - is damning evidence against the vile Smith.

What is amazing is that a mormon can see that, know it’s true, and rationalize that it doesn’t matter... or even make up some scenario where copying the errors while claiming it was divine revelation is perfectly OK.

It supports my on conclusion - mormonism is never about facts. It is always about feelings as a substitute for facts.

best,
ampu

We know that the Book of Mormon was first published in 1830. We know that the type was set from a manuscript of the Book of Mormon. That printer's manuscript was based on the original dictated manuscript.

The dictated manuscript was by scribes who wrote on paper the words that Joseph Smith spoke. The words that Joseph Smith spoke were not read from any book or manuscript in the English language. Through "the gift and power of God" Joseph Smith was able to read in English what was engraved in reformed Egyptian on golden plates that an angel led him to find.

Prior to publication of the Book of Mormon, Joseph was inspired to select two sets of witnesses. The first set would behold the book by the power of God: "The book shall be hid from the eyes of the world that the eyes of none shall behold it, save it be that three witnesses shall behold it by the power of God, beside him to whom the book shall be delivered, and they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein."

The second set would not behold the book by the power of God, but would behold it with their natural senses: "And there is none other which shall view it, save it be a few according to the will of God, to bear testimony of His word unto the children of men."

And so, the testimony of the three witnesses by the power of God and the testimony of eight witnesses who saw the golden plates and the engravings thereon, hefted them, and handled the leaves with their hands, have been printed in all of the millions of printed copies of translations of the Book of Mormon worldwide.

I wrote "translations" because the Mormon church especially, and the Community of Christ church to a lesser degree, have translated the Book of Mormon into many languages, thus fulfilling the beginning words of both testimonies of witnesses: "Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tougues, and people, unto whom this work shall come...".

None of the eleven of the witnesses, though many of them were at times estranged from the church or its leaders, ever denied their printed testimonies.

The Book of Mormon has been an inspiration for good for many people around the world. Its account of the ministry of Jesus Christ in Mesoamerica, in fulfillment of His New Testament promise, "Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice," teaches the universality of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world.

A portion of the Book of Mormon plates were sealed and therefore not translated. This was why the eight witnesses used this language: "and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands." Here is the book's promise concerning the sealed portion of the plates: "The revelation which was sealed shall be kept in the book until the own due time of the Lord, that they may come forth; for behold, they reveal all things from the foundation of the world unto the end thereof."

Here is the online Restored Covenant Edition of the Book of Mormon:
http://www.restoredcovenant.org/RCE.asp?CAT=RCE

The dictated manuscript was by scribes who wrote on paper the words that Joseph Smith spoke. The words that Joseph Smith spoke were not read from any book or manuscript in the English language.

Testimony of the scribes tell us that smith didn't use the plates at all. He stuffed his head into his hat with his seer stone.

The first set would behold the book by the power of God: "The book shall be hid from the eyes of the world that the eyes of none shall behold it, save it be that three witnesses shall behold it by the power of God, beside him to whom the book shall be delivered, and they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein."

Yet none of the three ever testified to viewing the plates with their PHYSICAL eyes John, but would only attest to seeing them with 'spiritual' eyes. How trustworthy were these three?

Martin Harris

... if the Saints wish to know what the Lord hath said of him, they may turn to the 178th page of the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and the person there called a 'wicked man' is no other than Martin Harris ... (Millennial Star, vol. 8, November 15, 1846, p. 124.)

Phineas H. Young, writing to Brigham Young from Kirtland, Ohio records, "Martin Harris is a firm believer in Shakerism, says his testimony is greater than it was of the Book of Mormon." (Gunnell 1955, 52) W.C. Gunnell in his dissertation on Martin Harris also notes regarding M. Harris' eventual rejoining of the church that "Martin's motives in being baptized at that time are not known, but the data of later events would indicate a lack of sincerity." (Gunnell 1955, 52)

Oliver Cowdery

Excommunicated from the mormon church. [Cowdery] transgressed the law of God; he committed adultery; the Spirit of God withdrew from him, and he, the second elder in the Church, was excommunicated from the Church. (Juvenile Instructor, 1885, p. 360)

Joseph Smith himself said, "Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them" (Smith 1902, 3:232).

David Whitmer

Joseph Smith himself said, "Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them" (Smith 1902, 3:232).

These are just excerpts - the credibility of the three as far as a witness to the bom is worthless, as their history has shown.

None of the eleven of the witnesses, though many of them were at times estranged from the church or its leaders, ever denied their printed testimonies.

Try excommunicated John, not estranged. AFA the other eight - it is notable that these eight men fall naturally into two groups of four. The first group is comprised of four brothers of David Whitmer, who himself was one of the three witnesses: Christian, Jacob, Peter jun., and John Whitmer. The second four are Joseph Smith's father, Joseph's two brothers (Hyrum and Samuel) and Hiram Page, who was married to the Whitmer's sister, Catherine. Another sister, Elizabeth, married Oliver Cowdery. So, all the witnesses, except Martin Harris, were closely related to one another.

Even if the majority of the witnesses to the Book of Mormon did not deny their testimony of the book itself, this does little to support Mormonism today. Current Mormon doctrine on the nature of God, the priesthood, use of temples, baptism for the dead, and men becoming gods, is nowhere contained in the Book of Mormon. By 1847 not a single one of the surviving eleven witnesses was part of the Mormon church. If these men were alive today, they would be considered apostates who had turned their back on the Spirit of God. They would be cut off from the LDS church and condemned to outer darkness, regardless of whether or not they still believed in the bom.

"and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands."

Only three of the eight witnesses made separate statements that they had handled the plates. They were Joseph's two brothers, Hyrum and Samuel, and John Whitmer. Hyrum and Samuel's statements are further qualified by their brother William who, in an interview, also claimed to have handled the plates. He said:
"I did not see them uncovered, but I handled them and hefted them while wrapped in a tow frock and judged them to have weighed about sixty pounds. ... Father and my brother Samuel saw them as I did while in the frock. So did Hyrum and others of the family."

Hiram Page's testimony regarding his part as one of the eight witnesses, he never mentions seeing or handling the plates, but instead emphasizes that Joseph had to have supernatural power to write such a book. He also says:
"And to say that those holy Angels who came and showed themselves to me as I was walking through the field, to confirm me in the work of the Lord of the last days — three of whom came to me afterwards and sang a hymn in their own pure language; yes, it would be treating the God of heaven with contempt, to deny these testimonies." (Ensign of Liberty, 1848, cited in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol 7:4, Winter 1972, p. 84.)

Sorry John, they didn't do as claimed - handle the leaves. Your witnesses are not credible, your prophet is not credible, your bom is not credible.

It supports my on conclusion - mormonism is never about facts. It is always about feelings as a substitute for facts.

Indeed!

“Prior to publication of the Book of Mormon, Joseph was inspired to select two sets of witnesses.”

“The second set would not behold the book by the power of God, but would behold it with their natural senses”

..... You left out the part where he chose witnesses of low character (and likely paid them).

“None of the eleven of the witnesses, though many of them were at times estranged from the church or its leaders, ever denied their printed testimonies.”

..... Oh, it’s way worse than the gloss you put on it!

These were exceptionally discredited people. Please read
the following from the Probe Ministries website. Each witness
is examined using mormon sources and contrasted with Christ’s
followers. It is a stunning difference:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Character of the 11 Witnesses

Joseph Smith claims that after he translated the plates,
he returned them to the angel Moroni. Therefore, there
is no way to verify the veracity of the plates or Smith’s
translation. Smith’s only defense of his account is the
eleven men who signed statements claiming to have seen
the golden plates. Therefore, the credibility of Smith’s
account rests on the testimony of these eleven witnesses.

There are three key witnesses who claim to have seen the
angel show the golden plates to them. The remaining eight
allege to have seen the plates but not the angel.

The LDS church asserts these men never denied their
testimony. However, when we examine the lives of the
witnesses, we find they were untrustworthy, wavering,
and gullible witnesses.

Six of the eleven witnesses, including the three key
witnesses were eventually excommunicated from the church.

=> Former Mormon President Ezra Taft Benson summed up the
=> legacy of the eleven witnesses this way. “Six of the
=> original Twelve Apostles selected by Joseph Smith were
=> excommunicated. The three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon
=> left the church.

Three of Joseph Smith’s counselors fell—one even helped
plot his death. . . . The wolves among our flock are more
numerous and devious today than when President Clark made
a similar statement [in 1949].”{6}

Let us first examine the character of the three key
witnesses since their testimony is the most important.

In a letter dated December 16, 1838, Joseph Smith stated
this about the three key witnesses and John Whitmer,
one of the eight. “John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver
Cowdery, and Martin Harris are too mean to mention.”{7}

=> Martin Harris’ testimony shows him to be a gullible
=> and unstable man. He changed his religious conviction
=> approximately thirteen times. He had joined several
=> Christian denominations and other cult groups that
=> include the Universalists, Strangites, and the Shakers.
=> {8}(Ankerberg, 196)

In Doctrine and Covenants, Joseph Smith gave revelations
in which he denounces Martin Harris and calls him a
“wicked man.”{9} The Mormon leaders published an article
in the Elder’s Journal, a Mormon publication edited by
Joseph Smith, in which they accused Harris guilty of
“swearing, lying, cheating, swindling, drinking, with
every species of debauchery. . .” (Elders Journal, August,
1838, 59).{10} Here the leaders of the Mormon Church
strongly criticize the character of Harris.

Oliver Cowdery was also shown to be a very gullible man.

He was led astray by Hiram Page, one of the eight witnesses
who himself claimed to have divine revelations from his own
seer stone. Although Joseph Smith denounced Hiram as a
false teacher, Smith stated “to our grief, however, we soon
found that Satan had been lying in wait to deceive. . . .
Brother Hiram Page had in his possession a certain stone,
by which he obtained certain ‘revelations’ . . . all of
which were entirely at variance with the order of God’s
House, . . .”{11} Despite Smith’s condemnation, Oliver
Cowdery joined Page’s movement. Not only was he a gullible
man, he was also indicted on several accounts of fraudulent
business practices. The Mormon Church in a letter wrote,
“During the career of Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer’s
bogus money business, it got abroad into the world that
they were engaged in it. . . . We have evidence of a very
strong character that you are at this very time engaged
with a gang of counterfeiters, coiners, and blacklegs . .
.”{12} Cowdery was eventually excommunicated and he later
joined the Methodist Church.

David Whitmer wrote, “God spake to me again by his own
voice from the heavens, and told me to ‘separate myself
from among the Latter- day Saints, for as they sought to do
unto me, so should it be done unto them.” In the spring of
1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had
gone deep into error and blindness. . . . About the same
time that I came out, the Spirit of God moved upon quite a
number of the brethren who came out, with their families,
all of the eight witnesses who were then living (except the
three Smiths) came out; . . .”{13} Here David Whitmer
denounced the Mormon Church and encouraged people to follow
his example and the example of the other witnesses and
leave the church.

Joseph Smith in response attacked the character of David
Whitmer. Smith stated, “God suffered such kind of beings
to afflict Job . . . this poor man who professes to be much
of a prophet, has no other dumb ass to ride but David
Whitmer, to forbid his madness when he goes up to curse
Israel: and this ass not being of the same kind as Balaam’s
. . . he brays out cursing instead of blessings. Poor
ass!”{14}

=> The character and life of the eleven witnesses to the Book
=> of Mormon are very different from the Apostles of Christ.
=> None of the Apostles wavered in their defense of Christ,
=> even though all suffered and most died for their faith.

=> The Apostles remained consistent in their teaching and
=> never fell into any type of apostasy. Their lives were
=> marked by honesty and integrity. They were never indicted
=> for any criminal activity except for preaching Christ. The
=> character of the Book of Mormon’s eleven witnesses does not
=> strengthen Smith’s defense but cast further doubt on its
authenticity.

Probe Ministry website quote

Reformed Egyptian...

That one gets me every time...

What was it in Shook's book, “Deformed English”....

“Doodling” as I think Baer said....

You are having too much fun Zilla.

Sorry John, they didn't do as claimed - handle the leaves. Your witnesses are not credible.

They eight witnesses testified to "all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work [the Book of Mormon] shall come" that "as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands: and we also saw the engravings thereon."

This is significant for understanding the origin of the Book of Mormon. It means that there were engravings on all the leaves that they handled, and they handled all of the leaves that Smith had translated, the only ones not translated being the sealed portion that they could not open for viewing.

Since they testified that the plates "have the appearance of gold", the time and expense for someone to have made up such plates with engravings on all of the leaves, in order to deceive the eight witnesses, is absurd, since a deception that did not involve plates to be examined by wirnesses would be easier in every way! The plates are real and were really examined by eight men who never denied their printed testimony.

The sequence back from printed Book of Mormon, to printer's manuscript, to dictated manuscript, to Joseph Smith speaking the words he was translating by the gift and power of God, from the plates that were, in full consciousness, later examined by the eight witnesses, leaves no room for the insertion of anything else into the sequence that produced the Book of Mormon.

Those who say that someone other than Joseph Smith produced the words that he read to the scribes of the dictated manuscript are not at all agreed on who the "real" author or authors was or were. Until they get their act together and agree on a deception that can be explained as fitting somewhere in the sequence from real plates, to speaking words read from the plates, to the dictated manuscript, to the printer's manuscript, to the first printing of the Book of Mormon, they will be seen for what they are, persons EMOTIONALLY WANTING the Book of Mormon to be false, without being able to explain exactly what the deception was and where it occurred in the sequence. To claim falsehood and not be able to demonstrate falsehood, in a way that the majority of Book of Mormon doubters can agree to, is childish.

The sequence back from printed Book of Mormon, to printer's manuscript, to dictated manuscript, to Joseph Smith speaking the words he was translating by the gift and power of God, from the plates that were, in full consciousness, later examined by the eight witnesses, leaves no room for the insertion of anything else into the sequence that produced the Book of Mormon.

And yet as many as 4000 revisions were made to the BOM, the most perfect book ever, AFTER it was presented to Smith by god. So either god is incompetent and can't accurately relate a story, he is a terrible publisher or Smith made it all up...

I can tell you were the smart money goes...

” Since they testified that the plates “have the appearance of gold”, the time and expense for someone to have made up such plates with engravings on all of the leaves, in order to deceive the eight witnesses, is absurd, since a deception that did not involve plates to be examined by wirnesses would be easier in every way! The plates are real and were really examined by eight men who never denied their printed testimony.”

John, based on your posts, I don’t think you can see the forest for the trees. Your posts are all about the trees.
The mormonic forest tells a very different story. I don’t think you can see it.

They “testified”, meaning smith wrote a statement that he got them to sign. We do not know if they actually saw anything.

“never denied their printed testimony” - meaning despite being thrown out of the mormon church, or changing their faith, they didn’t have a death wish.

John, if they actually handled and witnessed these miraculous plates, why did they leave or deny the church?

The mormon forest speaks volumes, if you take your eye off the details of individual trees...

It means that there were engravings on all the leaves that they handled, and they handled all of the leaves that Smith had translated, the only ones not translated being the sealed portion that they could not open for viewing.

Not according to their individual testimonies John - they only saw with 'spiritual' eyes, and handled something in a box covered up.

AFA the leaves smith 'translated', interesting since the scribes testimonies indicate that when smith was dictatating the 'translation' with his head in the hat the 'plates' were not even in the house.

The plates are real and were really examined by eight men who never denied their printed testimony.

Others testify to the contrary -

I have reflected long and deliberately upon the history of this church & weighed the evidence for & against it loth (sic) to give it up - but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver [Cowdery] nor David [Whitmer] & that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundation was sapped & the entire superstructure fell in heap of ruins.

I was followed by W Parrish, Luke Johnson & John Boynton [Boyington] all of who concurred with me, after we were done speaking M Harris arose & said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of [him/me?] but should have let it passed as it was... (Stephen Burnett letter to Lyman E. Johnson dated April 15, 1838. Typed transcript from Joseph Smith Papers, Letter book, April 20, 1837 - February 9, 1843, microfilm reel 2, pp. 64-66, LDS archives.)

Sorry John, the testimonies of the 'witnesses' say otherwise.

Those who say that someone other than Joseph Smith produced the words that he read to the scribes of the dictated manuscript are not at all agreed on who the "real" author or authors was or were.

Fact of the matter is the stories of these 'witnesses' are not credable given that many were excommunicated or left the church later under the most hostile conditions. Further, the mythology of how the bom was written is unbelieveable in the context of how it is presented. Smith had YEARS to produce this book with a limited number of 'scribes' all within his inner circle of confidence. Facts were produced in my previous post John showing that other writings preceeding the 'translation' contained the same themes, descriptions and in fact THE EXACT SAME WORDING as found in the BOM.

Until they get their act together and agree on a deception that can be explained as fitting somewhere in the sequence from real plates, to speaking words read from the plates, to the dictated manuscript, to the printer's manuscript, to the first printing of the Book of Mormon, they will be seen for what they are, persons EMOTIONALLY WANTING the Book of Mormon to be false, without being able to explain exactly what the deception was and where it occurred in the sequence.

This is only acceptable if the process is TRUE. It is fictional or highly modifed. Smith never used the plates to create the bom John - it is documented that he used folk magic method of sticking his face into a hat and 'viewing' through the seer stone.

As a convicted huckster and divinator - smith used the method common to him.

Smith could never keep his story line on translating the bom straight either -

1822 - Joseph Smith finds a seer stone while digging a well by his farmhouse
March 1826 - Joseph is arrested for "glass looking" with the seer stone to find buried treasure
Sept 1827 - Joseph finally takes possession of the plates April 1828 - Joseph begins translation of Book of Lehi with Martin Harris as scribe
June 1828 - Manuscripts for Book of Lehi are lost
July 1828 - Joseph receives revelation telling him his gift of translating is taken away for a season
Sept 1828 - Joseph starts re-translation of Book of Mormon without any instructions from God or any kind of revelation. He just does it on his own, the really odd thing is he doesn't attempt to re-translate the Book of Lehi, and skips 1Nephi, 2Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Jarom, Omni and Words of Mormon. He continues where he left off chronologically at the end of the Book of Lehi, or the beginning of Mosiah. His wife Emma served as scribe.
April 1829 - Joseph begins the "rapid-fire" translation now with Oliver Cowdery as scribe
May 1829 - Joseph receives revelation not to re-translate Book of Lehi and to replace it with Books of Nephi. The Lord also tells Joseph that "NOW" his gift of translating is "restored". So it was RESTORED even though smith had been TRANSLATING for the previous EIGHT MONTHS.
June 1829 - Transcript is finished, witnesses "see" the plates and Joseph gives them back to Moroni.

Of course, the historical records show us that Joseph began the re-translation process in September 1828, but he didn't receive the revelation with instructions on what to do about the Book of Lehi until May 1829. So true to form, mormonism CHANGES the date of the REVELATION in their scripture (D&C 10) to FIT the timeline. John - that is nothing less than outright FRAUD - literally lying about the date of this revelation to cover up the flawed story line. You can also look at the periods where 'translation' ceased - plenty of time to research existing books (like those cited earlier) to concoct and improve the 'story'.

No actually those who are emotional are those WANTING the bom to be true - since it is an EMOTIONAL test used to 'confirm' it - subjectively. Closer examination of the 'translation' timeline shows that the myth you've presented is not founded in FACT but in FICTION and doesn't even agree with the historical documentation - even that in mormon 'scriptures' (D&C).

Does it not concern you John that the mormon church had to alter its 'revelation' in such a manner to lie about the events? Here is another instance where Smith got caught in his lie and had to cover it up. Look at the history John and explain that.

Worth Repeating again and again - at high volume:

THERE WERE NO WITNESSES TO THE BOOK OF MORMON!

There were men of low character who were convinced to
sign a statement Smith wrote.

Read on...

“I have reflected long and deliberately upon the history of this church & weighed the evidence for & against it loth (sic) to give it up - but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver [Cowdery] nor David [Whitmer] & that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundation was sapped & the entire superstructure fell in heap of ruins.”

“I was followed by W Parrish, Luke Johnson & John Boynton [Boyington] all of who concurred with me, after we were done speaking M Harris arose & said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of [him/me?] but should have let it passed as it was... “

(Stephen Burnett letter to Lyman E. Johnson dated April 15, 1838. Typed transcript from Joseph Smith Papers, Letter book, April 20, 1837 - February 9, 1843, microfilm reel 2, pp. 64-66, LDS archives.)

The “witnesses” did not witness anything. There has arisen a whole mormon myth or legend about the witnesses and how they “prove” the story and how they never “recanted” their story.

It is a pack of deceptions, like all of mormonism.

And yet as many as 4000 revisions were made to the BOM, the most perfect book ever, AFTER it was presented to Smith by god. So either god is incompetent and can't accurately relate a story, he is a terrible publisher or Smith made it all up...I can tell you were the smart money goes...

Ejones & John, I wrote what's below and stuck this in an April 2009 FReeper thread about the D&C. Why? Because the D&C provides many “lessons” from Joseph Smith – if we will only learn them -- and one of them is it tells precisely WHO wrote the Book of Mormon!!!

Lessons of history: It announces who the real Book of Mormon author was -- not a Nephite; not an angel; not God, but Joseph Smith! (D&C 24:1).

”Behold, thou wast called and chosen to WRITE [note: word “translate” is nowhere to be found] the Book of Mormon…” (D&C 24:1)

It also tells us that some of the early Mormons were "terrible" (D&C 45:70) who engaged in "abominations" the year after the Book of Mormon was published. (D&C 50:4)

Political lesson: Well, it least it tells us that the original "Baurak" from Illinois wasn't Obama, but was Joseph Smith, Junior! [I tell no lie: ...pray earnestly that peradventure my servant Baurak Ale [Joseph Smith, jun.] may go with you, and preside in the midst of my people, and organize my kingdom upon the consecrated land..." (D&C 103:35)]

Anybody have a "graphic" of Baurak Ale they could post?

What else is "remarkable" about the D&C?

Health lesson of the day: Strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies. And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle... (D&C 89:7-8) [So, class, are you taking your slurp-free whiskey baths and are you ranchers healing your cattle with tobacca and healing your bruises with it as well? Class? Class???]

He gives us all lessons in math! "...if your enemy shall smite you the second time, and you revile not against your enemy, and bear it patiently, your reward shall be an hundred-fold. And again, if she shall smite you the third time, and ye bear it patiently, your reward shall be doubled unto you four-fold." (D&C 98:25-26)

What? "Doubled unto us four-fold?" I thought the second-smite reward was already 100-fold...and now Joe says it'll be doubled for a third smite...well, not exactly "doubled" but "doubled four-fold."

(Inmans, this will be on your math test, ya know)

English lesson: How to write 113 and 116-word run-on sentences. (Please review D&C 43:25 & 123:7). [Please, to show your learning curve you MUST, if you respond to this post, write only 100+ word sentences; oh, and John, 3 Nephi 21:2-7 was originally all one sentence in the 1830 Book of Mormon…such a wordy “jesus”]

Profound lessons of incredible wisdom and insight: ...children shall grow up until they become old; old men shall die... (D&C 63:51) [I've got to write that one down somewhere]

And today's Social Science lesson: It tells us that LDS have disobeyed the Mormon gods' command to "Let your families be small" (D&C 90:25)

Civil law lesson for the day: Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of land. (D&C 58:21) [Gee, I wonder why a footnote was added a few years later, saying "except polygamy"?]

Theology lesson for the day: God doesn't forgive simply because of His graciousness or His mercy or love or compassion. Nope. He forgives only because you obey! (D&C 84:61)

Class, now it's time to we unleash our imagination. You are a "seer." Now just let the revelations come. Here, let me show you: "And let the higher part of the inner court be dedicated unto me for the school of mine apostles, saith Son Ahman; or in other words, Alphus; or in other words, Omegus; even Jesus Christ your Lord. Amen." (D&C 95:17) ["Boy," he must have thought. "This is sure fun!!!"]

And Joseph keeps repeating this phrase in the D&C: "it mattereth not to me" -- as if the Mormon god is telling him something, but then adding as a caveat, "it mattereth not to me." (Hey, if it doesn't matter to the Mormon god, why is Joe "matterething" with it?)

Oh, and here's a lesson for concise business communications: "Saying: I, the Lord, will make known unto you what I will that ye shall do from this time until the next conference, which shall be held in Missouri, upon the land which I will consecrate unto my people, which are a remnant of Jacob, and those who are heirs according to the covenant." (D&C 52:2)

Well that was June of 1831 in Kirtland, Ohio. But Joseph already had Mormon settlers in Missouri & he was "sure" that his Zion was Missouri and that the Lord would come back in Missouri -- 'cause that's where, he said, the Garden of Eden was! So in early August, as Joseph leaving Kirtland in the dark of night because he owed debt on his bank, he said: Surely Zion is the city of our God, and surely Zion cannot fall, neither be moved out of her place..." (D&C 97:19)

So Smith was looking to his Missouri Zion to resettle. (The only problem was that two weeks prior to this "revelation" -- mail was slow, ya know, in those days -- on July 20, the Mormon Zionites were being run out of town at his new Zion settlement in Missouri!)

Well, the Mormon god's consecrations just didn't seem to last long. (And that's your real estate lesson for the day!)

Anybody have a "graphic" of Baurak Ale they could post?

"it mattereth not to me"

Got tired of writing "and it came to pass. . ."

Sept 1828 - Joseph starts re-translation of Book of Mormon without any instructions from God or any kind of revelation. He just does it on his own, the really odd thing is he doesn't attempt to re-translate the Book of Lehi, and skips 1Nephi, 2Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Jarom, Omni and Words of Mormon. He continues where he left off chronologically at the end of the Book of Lehi, or the beginning of Mosiah. His wife Emma served as scribe. April 1829 - Joseph begins the "rapid-fire" translation now with Oliver Cowdery as scribe [Godzilla]

[BTW, excellent timing sequence, ‘Zilla]. What is one of those “re-translated” “revelations” supposedly given to Smith during this time frame? – a “revelation” from March, 1829 that made it into two distinct versions as recorded in both the Book of Commandments (1833) and Doctrine & Covenants?

The sequence back from printed Book of Mormon, to printer's manuscript, to dictated manuscript, to Joseph Smith speaking the words he was translating by the gift and power of God, from the plates that were, in full consciousness, later examined by the eight witnesses, leaves no room for the insertion of anything else into the sequence that produced the Book of Mormon. Those who say that someone other than Joseph Smith produced the words that he read to the scribes of the dictated manuscript are not at all agreed on who the "real" author or authors was or were. Until they get their act together and agree on a deception that can be explained as fitting somewhere in the sequence from real plates, to speaking words read from the plates, to the dictated manuscript, to the printer's manuscript, to the first printing of the Book of Mormon, they will be seen for what they are, persons EMOTIONALLY WANTING the Book of Mormon to be false, without being able to explain exactly what the deception was and where it occurred in the sequence. To claim falsehood and not be able to demonstrate falsehood, in a way that the majority of Book of Mormon doubters can agree to, is childish. [John McDonnell]

Well, since what I’m about to say responds to this as well, I wanted to quote you John. You mention the sequence of Smith supposedly “translating by the gift and power of God” -- but by what authority did he have to actually change these so-called “revelations” from one printing to the next? And not just in the BoM, but the D&C as well. And an even bigger question, is that Smith claimed during this time frame ‘Zilla wrote about, that God told him that ”he shall pretend to no other gift” than translating “the book” [Smith didn’t even say “plates” in his original March 1829 “revelation”]. And, in fact, Smith was supposedly told ”for I will grant him no other gift.” On what grounds, then, did Smith go on to claim other ensuing revelation gifts? And why did he completely edit this “revelation” from what appeared in the original 1833 Book of Commandments to a later edition of this “same” “revelation” in the D&C?

Book of Commandments, chapter IV, p. 10: “…he has a gift to translate the book, and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift.” (Title at top: “A revelation given to Joseph and Martin, in Harmony, Pennsylvania, March, 1829…”)

The bold-faced copy below was added later by Smith AFTER the publishing of the 1833 Book of Commandments. (How can you add to later revelations by God? If it was from God, who were you to censor and edit out God in the original version – only to quote him at more length later on? Does God appreciate having an “editor?”)

“…you have [changed from “he has”] a gift to translate the plates [changed from “book”] and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should (“that you should” was originally “that he shall”] pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished.” (Current version of both Lds & Rlds D&C 5:4)

Again, these bold faced words were NOT in the original so-called March 1829 revelation. How do I know this? I have a copy of the 1833 Book of Commandments -- and I wrote the above comparing p. 10 of the BoC to D&C 5:4.

You need to answer this, John.

You need to answer this, John.

And you need to answer these questions. Who was the author or authors of the Book of Mormon? Was it based on the Solomon Spalding romance, the one that was discovered and reported on in 1885, which has no reference to Nephi and Lehi as was previously claimed? Was it based on a manuscript by a different Spalding? If so, where is that manuscript and its references to Nephi and Lehi as was claimed? Did Sydney Rigdon author the Book of Mormon? If so, can you document contacts between Rigdon and Smith before the Book of Mormon was published? Did Joseph Smith author, not just translate, the Book of Mormon? Exept for an ability to read, Joseph Smith was nearly uneducated. Yet millions of copies of the book have been sold, and it has been translated into many languages. How do you explain the foresight of the witnesses who testified to "nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come"?

But most importantly, is there among those who oppose "Joe Smith and his Mormon Bible" a clear consensus on who authored it? If there is, evidence should have been compiled to support JUST THAT AUTHORSHIP AND NO OTHER! If there is not a consensus... well, isn't that the case?

(Stephen Burnett letter to Lyman E. Johnson dated April 15, 1838. Typed transcript from Joseph Smith Papers, Letter book, April 20, 1837 - February 9, 1843, microfilm reel 2, pp. 64-66, LDS archives.)

The “witnesses” did not witness anything.

Just as digruntled postal workers sometimes go postal, the disgruntled Stephen Burnett, who lost money in a church investment, went Stephen Burnett.

The witnesses DID witness what they formally testified of "unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come", and it HAS come to many nations, kindreds, tougues, and people! If these men were liars, why didn't God embarrass them by having the first edition of the Book of Mormon also be its last? Their printed testimonies have greater weight than disgruntled Stephen Burnett's angry letter. Though many of them became disgruntled themselves, instead of going Stephen Burnett, they never denied their written testimonies, which means that their testimonies are all the more reliable.

If these men were liars, why didn't God embarrass them by having the first edition of the Book of Mormon also be its last?

Why has the Qur'an been around for almost 1500 years?

"If these men were liars, why didn't God embarrass them by having the first edition of the Book of Mormon also be its last?"

Lies are eventually exposed to be lies. Mark Hofmann was so clever in his document forgeries that he deceived both LDS and RLDS historians, and also document experts. Yet his forgeries are now known to be forgeries, while he rots in prison for killing people who were on the brink of exposing his deceptions.

If the witnesses lied, or conspired to lie, such deception would have long ago been revealed. The fact that most of the witnesses became estranged from the church that published the Book of Mormon containing their testimonies would surely have caused one or more of them to tell about any deception that they had engaged in. The fact that all eleven of them remained true to their printed testimonies, despite frustrations and disappointments regarding the publishing organization, is overwhelming evidence that they had not engaged in deception.

As they lived their lives, some of them were approached by persons who knew of their estrangement and wanted to get them to admit to deception. The most interviewed witness was the last surviving of them: David Whitmer. If any of the ten who had died before him had confessed to deception, the game would have been over, and there would be little need to interview him. But none of the previous ten had ever confessed to deception. Therefore, David Whitmer was badgered and hounded by persons eager to not allow the last remaining witness to die firm in his testimony. Yet he did die firm in his testimony.

This leaves enemies of the Book of Mormon in a pitiful condition regarding the witnesses. It means that they have to invent a new standard to judge by: refusing to believe the printed testimonies unless they are backed up by other statements by the individual witnesses. This is a false standard, because it tries to diminish testimonies made "with words of soberness" while inflating more casual comments.

An 1828 revelation through Joseph Smith has this warning: "Verily, verily I say unto you, Woe be unto him that lieth to deceive, because he supposes that another lieth to deceive, for such are not exempt from the justice of God."

What I take that to mean is that even though you may think that people have lied to deceive, that is no excuse for you to lie or quote lies about them. Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses by Richard Lloyd Anderson should be required reading for anyone wishing to criticize the witnesses without quoting lies about them in the process.

That really doesn't answer my question does it...