Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Defending the Faith: Top Book of Mormon expert Royal Skousen to lecture
Deseret News ^ | Feb. 7, 2013 | Daniel Peterson

Posted on 02/24/2013 3:13:06 PM PST by Colofornian

Readers along Utah’s Wasatch Front will have a rare opportunity to hear from the foremost expert on the history of the text of the Book of Mormon between late February and the middle of March.

In a series titled “25 Years of Research: What We Have Learned about the Book of Mormon Text,” professor Royal Skousen will discuss “The Original and Printer’s Manuscripts” (Tuesday, Feb. 26), “The Printed Editions” (Tuesday, March 5) and “The Nature of the Original Text” (Tuesday, March 12).

A professor of linguistics and English language at BYU, Skousen is the founder of the “analogical modeling” approach to linguistics and the author of several technical books on that subject...

Among Latter-day Saints, though, he’s best known for having devoted a quarter of a century to meticulous study of the creation of the English text of the Book of Mormon and its transmission thereafter.

There is, quite simply, no person on the planet who knows more about this subject than Royal Skousen, and there never has been. He’s published the results of his research in numerous articles and several large volumes, as well as in his Yale University Press edition of “The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text,” which appeared in 2009.

And his findings are fascinating.

Glitches that have crept into the text...

SNIP

Intriguingly, too, Skousen (a specialist, be it remembered, in linguistics and the English language) contends that the language of the Book of Mormon isn’t Joseph Smith’s early 19th-century dialect, but English of the 1500s and 1600s. Indeed, certain elements of Book of Mormon vocabulary may derive from a period prior to the King James Bible — which is certainly something to ponder.

(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...


TOPICS: General Discusssion; History; Other non-Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: bookofmormon; inman; kingjamesenglish; lds; mormonism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
From the article by a Mopologist: Intriguingly, too, Skousen (a specialist, be it remembered, in linguistics and the English language) contends that the language of the Book of Mormon isn’t Joseph Smith’s early 19th-century dialect, but English of the 1500s and 1600s. Indeed, certain elements of Book of Mormon vocabulary may derive from a period prior to the King James Bible — which is certainly something to ponder.

Why...that's peculiar...
...supposed "gold plates" from B.C. and early A.D. times...
..."translated" for people in the 19th century who don't speak KJV English other than in churches when reading the KJV Bible...
...winds up repeatedly citing KJV English of the early 17th century...
...even oft' screwing up King James grammar as it was oft' used in the 17th century!

Imagine that!!!!

Ya don't imagine that Joseph Smith was trying to convince readers that the book he was trying to hawk (he attempted to sell it in Canada) was somehow the equivalent of the King James Bible, do you???

1 posted on 02/24/2013 3:13:15 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Who authored the Book of Mormon?

* On the 1830 version of the BoM, on the title page, Smith answers this plainly: Joseph Smith, Jr. AUTHOR and PROPRIETOR
* Lds "scripture" -- Doctrine & Covenants 24:1 -- says Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon (it doesn't say he "translated" them).

Who else heavily contributed to the Book of Mormon

Why the King James Bible itself!!


Whole chapters from Isaiah and other minor prophets (like 3 Nephi 24 & 25 is Malachi 3 & 4) are pulled wholesale into the BoM...13 such chapters, if my memory serves me correctly. 3 Nephi 21:12-18 resembles Micah 5:8-14. 3 Nephi 20:16-18 echoes Micah 4:12-13; 5:8-9.

Was plagiarism from the King James Bible involved?

We know that the King James Version Bible became the plagiaristic source for Joseph Smith as he copied approximately 27,000 overall words airlifted, thee-for-thee and thou-for-thou, from the Bible into the Book of Mormon (even though 1830 America didn't use "thee" and "thou" in everyday language). That’s why Lds need to look at the 1830version of the BoM. Because with the 4,000+ clean-up changes that smoothes things over, you have much less of a mountaintop-to-valley experience in reading the current BoM than the 1830 version.

Outright plagiarism from the KJV at times got Smith into trouble by revealing his true source -- that it wasn't "gold plates," after all, that he was "translating."

Example #1: 2 Nephi 23 of the Book of Mormon is a word-for-word theft of Isaiah 13 [and please note...that the italicized words of Isaiah 13, KJ Version during Joseph Smith's day, were not in the original Hebrew from which the KJV was translated...So if they weren't in the Hebrew, how did Nephi get them? Did he reach into the future of 1611 in the UK, and superimpose them into golden plates between 559 and 545 BC?]

Example #2 Per http://www.undergroundnotes.com/Smithbook.pdf -- In the "Mosiah" chapter fourteen in the Book of Mormon, Isaiah chapter fifty-three is copied word for word, including the italicized words that the King James translators added for clarity! There are sixteen italicized words from the King James Bible in "Mosiah" fourteen. The list of italicized words 
are
and (three times),
there is,
our,
was (twice),
he was,
was any
his (twice),
a portion (once).
How did these italicized words from a 1611 translation get into a document that was supposedly written before the time of Christ? The answer is obvious: Smith copied them when plagiarizing the King James translation of the prophet Isaiah.

Example #3: Finally, compare 1 Nephi 22:20 in the Book of Mormon with Acts 3:22:

Acts 3:22, as cited by the Kings James Translators in 1611 using common 17th-century language of the era to translate something from over 1500 years prior:

For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you (Acts 3:22)

Now compare that to 1 Nephi 22:20, as cited by Joseph Smith in 1830 using common 1611 language to "translate" something supposedly originally said 2400 years earlier – and  600+ years PRIOR to Peter's quotation.

The issue is not the paraphrases of the first 7 words of Acts 3:22 or the first 19 words of 1 Nephi 22:20...It's what follows: Acts 3:22"A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you...like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you"
...Compared & Contrasted to... 
1 Nephi 22:20"A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you"

Except for "unto your brethren" midway between the above two phrases in Acts 3:22, 'tis the exact SAME King James language "paraphrase," even though the NT was in Greek and the Book of Mormon supposedly wasn't -- and even though 19th century Americans were closer to 1950s American culture than 1611 speech wise!

Please note that when you "paraphrase" someone you do exactly that -- you paraphrase. You don't quote someone word for word for 27 exact King James English words within two phrases -- putting the exact same semi-colon at the exact same spot...and you certainly don't quote exactly somebody supposedly speaking over 600 years in the future of your statement in a historical colloquialism from 200 years behind you in its exact translation. (Please also check Deut. 18:15, 18 and you'll see that indeed BOTH Acts 3:22 and 1 Nephi 22:20 are EACH paraphrases of those verses).

Bottom line: The apostle Peter paraphrased Moses in his original language; and the Book of Mormon writer -- IF it was a historical doc -- could also paraphrase Moses in his own language within a separate venue. (No concern in and of itself). It's only when you compare the additional generations of paraphrasing and translating that it becomes quite obvious where Smith got his source for 1 Nephi 22:20.

IllustrationIf a person's FR posts were to be published in the year 3800 in a publication -- and they used an exact version of that quotation as it appeared in a British cockney-slang or Scottish colloquial vocab-adapted publication as published in the year 3575 -- I don't think future FReepers would tell us with a straight face that the author of the year 3800 publication "translated" the original Freeper source from gold-plated Freeper documents written in the year 2013...with his face stuck in a hat. 

2 posted on 02/24/2013 3:18:44 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

One of my mormon uncles (who has been a bishop), has a PhD in geology.
He told me that there is zero physical evidence to support anything in the BoM, which is why they call it faith.
This article is very interesting (from a mormon publication).


3 posted on 02/24/2013 3:19:11 PM PST by svcw (Why is one cell on another planet considered life, and in the womb it is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
His uncle is W. Cleon Skousen, author of the bestseller The Naked Communist (Salt Lake City, Utah: Ensign, 1958)
4 posted on 02/24/2013 3:20:23 PM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
How much is the Book of Mormon's loss of trustworthiness a factor for disaffected and dissociating Mormons?

Per UNDERSTANDING MORMON DISBELIEF: Why do some Mormons lose their testimony, and what happens to them when they do? -- it's the # 4 reason (almost 2/3rds)...(see page 8 of that study).

Per page 14 of that study, things like anachronisms in the Book of Mormon effect more Lds males than females.

5 posted on 02/24/2013 3:27:57 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Here's a good link for studying more on the Book of Mormon: MORMONS IN SHOCK: Love warns of danger
6 posted on 02/24/2013 3:33:50 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

Is this the same Skousen that wrote “Strategic Location?” It is a guide about the best places to go in event of a nuclear attack. The book say the inter-mountain west is. Utah, etc.


7 posted on 02/24/2013 3:33:50 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

“may derive” ... what kind of expert is this gentleman?


8 posted on 02/24/2013 3:34:35 PM PST by exnavy (Fish or cut bait ...Got ammo, Godspeed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

And it came to pass ....


9 posted on 02/24/2013 3:37:47 PM PST by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
BTW...If I as an author was to...
...heavily plagiarize Biblical phrases from the Bible without credit -- even copying 11 word-for-word chapters from the Bible (as does the Book of Mormon) -- all so that when somebody read my stories I wind up adding to my "own version" of "scriptures"...
...yielding a sense of "credibility"...
...do you think such plagiarism of the most popular book in the history of the world would gain a standing ovation?

And if I as an author was to...
...heavily borrow from the Bible even narratives -- and just "change out" the character involved -- do you think that would cause on "encore" call from the audience?

Note: An estimated 17,000+ words (26+ pages) of [KJV] ...material...either verbatim quotations of the KJV Bible, or advance revelations of what would be written later, all in 1611 King James wording found its way into the Book of Mormon.

Well, I guess that shows Joseph Smith knew how to "cut & paste" back in his day, too...

And one more thing: When I open up my Book of Mormon to 2 Nephi 24, yes, it says, for example "Compare Isaiah 14" -- but it doesn't say, "lifted word for word" from the King James version of Isaiah 14 e'en tho 2 Nephi supposedly comes from B.C. gold plates!

10 posted on 02/24/2013 3:38:35 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Even more astonishing is that the revelations in the D&C are Less than three weeks ago, ex-Mormon RPackham was on the exmormon.org forum The King James Bible vs. Ancient Plates and in that Feb. 5 post, made some interesting observations about Joseph Smith electing to use King James verbiage in the 19th century Doctrine & Covenants as well...he also has some notes about KJV language in the Book of Mormon toward the end of these comments:

ALSO mostly in King James English (the actual words dictated by God himself!) and they are full of grammatical errors!

The English of 1611 had its grammatical rules, many of which were quite different from the grammatical rules of modern English. Although they were not always as strictly observed by the English of that time, there was not a lot of latitude. Many usages we now consider "correct English" were barely coming into use then, and were thus "incorrect." For example, "thou" "thee," "thy," and "thine" were used to refer only to the single (singular) person being addressed; "ye," "you," "your" and "yours" were used only when addressing more than one person, or a person to whom great respect was due. ("Ye" was the subject form, "you" the object form.) They were not interchangeable, any more than "I" and "we" are interchangeable in modern English. Nor were "ye" and "you" interchangeable, any more than "they" and "them."

"He has" is modern English. No Elizabethan would say that, but rather "he hath." ("Has" does not occur at all in the King James Bible, but 134 times in the Doctrine and Covenants, along with 100 occurrences of "hath.") The correct possessive for "it" in King James' time was not "its," as in modern English, but "his." (See the first chapter of Genesis for numerous examples.)

Surely if God were speaking modern English, he would not say things like "you is" or "we am," "Are Joseph here? Yes, they art." Nor would he arbitrarily switch from archaic English to modern English, often within the same sentence. And yet that is precisely the kind of ungrammatical imitation of King James English in Mormon scriptures. Here are some examples:

In D&C 3:10 God is speaking to Joseph only: "...repent of what thou hast done, which is contrary to the commandment which I gave you, and thou art still chosen..." (unnecessary switching from singular to plural and back again)

In D&C 6 God speaks to Oliver Cowdery, especially from v. 16 on. From verses 16 to 20, God addresses Oliver correctly with the singular forms "thou," "thee," etc. But from verse 21 to the end, he addressed Oliver incorrectly with the "you" (plural) forms. Similar switching back and forth are in sections 8 and 9.

At D&C 6:16 God says, "...there is none else save God that knowest thy thoughts..." It should be "knoweth," of course: "knowest" can only be used if "thou" is the subject: "thou knowest."

At D&C 105:1 God says, "“Verily I say unto you who have assembled yourselves here that you may learn my will....” (incorrect use of "you" as subject.)

In D&C 10 God is speaking to Joseph Smith. In the first fourteen verses he addresses Smith using the plural forms of "you" a total of 28 times. Then in verse 15 he correctly reverts to the singular: “..[Satan] has put it into their hearts to get thee to tempt the Lord thy God, ..”

The same kinds of error are also frequent in the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 1:30-32, Lehi speaks to Zoram (as divinely translated by God's inspired translator): "And now, Zoram, I speak unto you: Behold, thou art the servant of Laban...if ye shall keep the commandments of the Lord, the Lord hath consecrated this land for the security of thy seed with the seed of my son." (incorrect switching between singular and plural)

2 Nephi 3:1, Lehi says: "And now I speak unto you, Joseph, my last-born. Thou wast born in the wilderness of mine afflictions; yea, in the days of my greatest sorrow did thy mother bear thee. (incorrect switching between singular and plural)

Mosiah 2:19-20, King Benjamin says: "O how you ought to thank your heavenly King! ... if you should render all the thanks and praise..." (object form used as subject; should be "ye"; also verses 21, 34, 40, also 4:10, 21, 5:15. More examples of "you" incorrectly used as a subject: Mosiah 12:25, 30; 13:10; 18:10, 13; 24:14; 29:13; Alma 5:6, 16, 19, 20, 22, 55; 7:6, 17, 27; 9:18; 32:28, 30, 34; 37:16; 38:2; many others)

Alma 36 through 42 contain Alma's advice to his sons, each chapter addressed individually to the named son.. He repeatedly uses "ye" and "you" (plural) rather than the singular "thou" and "thee", although occasionally also using the singular (as in 36:3)

These are only a sampling of hundreds of other examples that could be cited, where God (or God's divinely inspired translator) is ungrammatical. Over the years, the Mormon church has corrected over 3,000 errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and awkward wording in the Book of Mormon since its first publication in 1830, such things as "they was," "he seen," which would have been obviously incorrect to an educated speaker of modern English. One would think they would correct the many violations of King James era grammar as well. Especially if that style of English is God's preferred language when communicating with modern English speakers.

11 posted on 02/24/2013 3:44:13 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill; sasportas
His uncle is W. Cleon Skousen, author of the bestseller The Naked Communist (Salt Lake City, Utah: Ensign, 1958)

Btw, Dr. W. Cleon Skousen once declared that God could "cease to be God" if ever He lost the support of other gods...

Interesting, eh?

Here, I'll let Dr. Cleon Skousen speak for himself: Through modern revelation we learn that the universe is filled with vast numbers of intelligence's, and we further learn that Elohim is God simply because all of these intelligence's honor and sustain Him as such...since God 'acquired' the honor and sustaining influence of 'all things' it follows as a corollary that if He should ever do anything to violate the confidence or 'sense of justice' of these intelligences, they would promptly withdraw their support, and the 'power' of God would disintegrate...'He would cease to be God'“ (The First 2,000 Years, pp. 355-356).

Hmm...and yet Glenn Beck first cited Dr. Cleon Skousen in his 2003 book The Real America: Messages from the Heart and the Heartland and then later started pitching Skousen’s 1981 book The 5,000 Year Leap on air in December, 2008. Beck then wrote a preface for a new edition of the book issued a few months later and in his March 2009 kick-off of the 9/12 movement declared Skousen’s book to be “divinely inspired.”

Well, what do you expect? Both Beck & Skousen, part of the same Mormon "brethren," espouse the Mormon belief that God was once a man and "acquired" godhood; and that, you can do that, too. And that the Mormon god is part of a broader "council of gods" (Skousen's "intelligences" who "honor and sustain" that god as a "fellow god")

I still wonder if Beck believes Skousen's "pro-family" view on parenthood? (That parenthood = godhood???)

Dr. Cleon Skousen: “Mortality made it possible for us to be endowed with the powers of procreation for the first time…The divine power of procreation is described by the Lord as being a fundamental quality of Godhood. In fact, eternal parenthood is Godhood” (The First 2000 Years, pp. 39-40).

To unpack Skousen, what's he saying here?
Perhaps you've seen the Lds bumper sticker, "Families are forever." Lds get that from Joseph Smith's Doctrine & Covenants D&C 132 re: "eternal (celestial) marriage."
Well Skousen used the same section --vv. 19-20 to teach eternal parenthood. (The thing is those verses also teach polygamy)
What did Skousen mean by his reference to "mortality" and "procreation for the first time"?

Well, Lds believe that by Adam & Eve sinning, it wasn't simply a "fall" -- it was a "fall upward" -- an event to be "celebrated." (see quote below)

Why? Because they believe that it was only by mankind sinning that they could die -- becoming "mortal." And that by becoming "mortal" they could rise to godhood. (They get this in part from the Book of Mormon -- a phrase that reads, "Adam fell that men might be..." [it doesn't say be what...Mormons fill in the blank on that]

Anyway, Skousen didn't believe that God made Eve able to reproduce until she fell; hence, obeying Satan the tempter was to Mormons a "good thing."

In this way, Mormons have the absolute wacky understanding that the world's evils were something the Mormon god wanted man to do:

The Lds church in one of its priesthood manuals calls the Fall a "Great Blessing" while one of its general authorities, "apostle" Dallin Oaks, wrote:
"Some Christians condemn Eve for her act, concluding that she and her daughters are somehow flawed by it. Not the Latter-day Saints! Informed by revelation, we celebrate Eve's act and honor her with wisdom and courage in the great episode called the Fall." ("The Choice that Began Mortality" Lds Church official publication Liahona, 2002)

12 posted on 02/24/2013 3:54:44 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

I flew into Salt Lake City in 1997 and again in 1998. I was going fly fishing in southwestern Wyoming around Green River, and then up to the Wind River area/range and on to Cody,WY. All I can state is the SLC airport was full of the ruddest people I have ever seen/encountered and I thought nothing could top NYC.


13 posted on 02/24/2013 4:10:11 PM PST by Lumper20 (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Cleon’s nephew, how nice. Still trying to redeem the family’s religious heritage. Well, good luck there, Royal. All you can do is polish a turd ... but a turd it remains.


14 posted on 02/24/2013 4:11:34 PM PST by Belteshazzar (We are not justified by our works but by faith - De Jacob et vita beata 2 +Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

Mormon...


15 posted on 02/24/2013 4:18:04 PM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
You're thinking of Strategic Relocation: North American Guide to Safe Places by Joel Skousen (Lehi, Utah: Swift, 2010). The author is the brother of Mark and Royal Skousen and was the executive editor of Conservative Digest in the 1980's (believe it or not, in 1986, I found a copy of Conservative Digest at a magazine stand in Harvard Yard).
16 posted on 02/24/2013 4:25:23 PM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

What I can’t understand is how this Skousen guy can be legitimately called a “specialist in linguistics and the English language” yet completely IGNORE the blatant and easily proven plagiarism in the BOM? Where do his credentials come from? Who says he is a specialist? The same ones that credentialed the “professor” that supposedly verified the characters Smith wrote down were genuine? I feel badly for all the people caught up in this fraud. It must be incredibly hard to leave a religion you were raised in and which all your friends and family hold to. But God was able to deliver me from a false religion, nothing is impossible for Him.


17 posted on 02/24/2013 4:55:37 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

is this guy related to the 5,000 Year Leap fellow ???


18 posted on 02/24/2013 4:59:30 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle; All
And it came to pass ....

Just posted another thread: Original Language of the Book of Mormon: Upstate New York Dialect, King James English, or Hebrew? written by Royal Skousen in 1994 and published by the BYU Maxwell Institute.

In that piece, Skousen says:

...the original text of the Book of Mormon contains expressions which seem inappropriate or improper in some of their uses. For example, in the original text a good many occurrences of the phrase "and it came to pass" are found in inappropriate contexts. In his editing for the 1837 edition, Joseph Smith removed at least 47 of these apparently extraneous uses of this well-worked phrase. In most cases, there were two or more examples of "it came to pass" in close proximity; in some cases, nothing new had "come to pass."

In that thread, I then ask (& suggest an answer) a series of questions:

Per this Mopologist cite (http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Evidences/And_it_came_to_pass), Joseph Smith uses the phrase "it came to pass" 1,404 times. I assume since Royal Skousen says Smith removed 47 of them in the 1837 edition, that the original 1830 edition then had 1,451 "it came to pass" references.

* Why so many?
* Why “it came to pass” when even Lds “scholars” concede that “nothing” new had come to pass?
* I mean per the Book of Mormon character, “Jacob” – IF what he said was so – that "I cannot write but a little of my words, because of the difficulty of engraving our words upon plates" (Jacob 4:1) … then why would these Book of Mormon etchers take to time to etch “it came to pass” over 1,450 times?
* And why other seemingly meaningless endless repetition of words like “exceeding” and “exceedingly” and “behold” and even some phrases which (laughingly) combine several of these...like "Therefore, behold, it came to pass..." (Ether 9:1)
* If what the characters “Jacob” and “Mormon” wrote were true...that 'twas difficult to engrave letters on gold plates (see above Jacob 4:1)...and ”if our plates had been sufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew” (Mormon 9:33)...thereby supposedly forcing them to write in a language of their enemies...a language, actually, nobody has heard of (“Reformed Egyptian”)... then how come we have verses like 4 Nephi 1:6, where the writer takes 57 words to simply say 59 years passed??? "And thus did the thirty and eighth year pass away, and also the thirty and ninth, and forty and first, and the forty and second, yea, even until forty and nine years had passed away, also the fifty and first, and the fifty and second; yea, and even until fifty and nine years had passed away." (4 Nephi 1:6)

19 posted on 02/24/2013 5:09:29 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

My thoughts on the legitimacy of the Book of Mormon aside, I think it might be in the best interests of men to focus on the big picture portrayed in the book.

A big picture that is oft occluded.

Therein is an account of two divisions of people that reportedly destroyed each other, to the man, over and because of a woman.

A symbol of that church, “Deseret” is represented by the the Hive.

A hive is ruled by a queen where the men are subordinate and disposable.


20 posted on 02/24/2013 5:20:11 PM PST by conserv8 (Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; Fiji Hill

Yup...Fiji Hill in post #4 mentions uncle-nephew ties...see also post #12 for reference to 5,000 Year Leap...


21 posted on 02/24/2013 5:38:08 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

I thought it odd in reading Strategic Locations, that Skousen supposedly speaks for American conservatives everywhere, mostly Christians, in his book, yet he spoke highly of Mormons. Now I know why. He himself is one. He hid that fact in his book. He said Mormons have taken a bad rap in his book, they are good “Christians.” A red flag went up big time.

He seemed to be following Joe Smith’s white horse prophecy to a tee in the book, guiding Christians to the inter-mountain west to escape the threat of the Chinese. Well, this is precisely what Joe Smith prophesied. Red flags everywhere.

The name, Skousen, should have clued me in as to who this guy was.


22 posted on 02/24/2013 6:18:33 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Joseph Smith - Plagiarist, Scammer, Horndog, Adulterer, Cultist.


23 posted on 02/24/2013 6:34:24 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Gone rogue, gone Galt, gone international, gone independent. Gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; All
What I can’t understand is how this Skousen guy can be legitimately called a “specialist in linguistics and the English language” yet completely IGNORE the blatant and easily proven plagiarism in the BOM? Where do his credentials come from? Who says he is a specialist? The same ones that credentialed the “professor” that supposedly verified the characters Smith wrote down were genuine? I feel badly for all the people caught up in this fraud. It must be incredibly hard to leave a religion you were raised in and which all your friends and family hold to. But God was able to deliver me from a false religion, nothing is impossible for Him.

Yes re: how difficult it can be for Mormons to leave their "identity," their family, their social community, etc.

Re: Skousen...

One other comment I might have is why ”it came to pass” was three times written in Smith’s 1832 diary, including when he was writing about his “vision”? (see “An American Prophet’s Record, pp. 6, 7, 8).

Skousen has no doubt poured over this written record. In the link I provide in post #19, Skousen even knows how many times "it came to pass" was edited out of the 1837 revision of the Book of Mormon (47x).

Ya know, when...
(a) ...your job/career depends upon not ruffling waters...
(b) ...& the "respect" accorded you by your fellow gullibles...
(c) ... and everything else we've referenced...
...unfortunately too many have concluded, "Truth be damned."

And anathematized too many wind up goin'.

And it's all preventable.

The choice, Mormons, is yours...not easy...but as the Mormon hymn goes, Do What is Right [Let the Consequences Follow]

24 posted on 02/24/2013 6:37:40 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Inuendos, Distortions, Smears .....

Colofornain, Does your life have no positive purpose and direction?

I would encourage you to find the Love of Jesus Christ, let it fill your soul with peace and love in order to settle the dispise in your heart.

But just to go one round of tit for tat .... Since in your opinion we LDS are not really Christian, what about Emperor
Constantine?

Emperor Constantine helped found your Christology by dictating a portion of the Nicene Creed before he was even a Christian.

At the end of his life Constantine anfinally accepted baptism by Eusibius a non-Nicene, Arius defender.

So in otherwords, A main founder of your Christian belief system, converted to a Christology much closer to the LDS Christology when he finally was baptised.

So is the venerated Saint Contantine a Christian? If so, he died believing in a Christ much closer to the LDS beliefs than to you Nicene belief?


25 posted on 02/24/2013 6:54:37 PM PST by teppe (... for my God ... for my Family ... for my Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: teppe
Teppe, please start a thread on Constantine...I'm sure many would "flock" to it...

Btw, if you ever a missionary, did you just give hit & run shots & leave homes whenever anybody countered your viewpoint?

My impression, Teppe, is that you have RARELY engaged in any meaningful dialogue on these threads.

I mean, even you disagreed with everything I said, why is it that everything is hit & run?

I mean, a LOT of Mormons rightly have expressed concern when street-witnessing Christians engage in hit & run tactics without EVER expressing a willingness to dialogue in a cool & calm way.

I've had LOTS & LOTS of interesting extended dialogues with Lds missionaries. Most of them have been willing to move off their "Lesson 1, 2, 3 progression" and actually converse.

With you, just about every time I've responded to your concerns, I don't receive any additional feedback.

I just hope you don't treat your fellow stake clubbers, your family, your co-workers, and anybody else within your life that way.

Just sayin'...

You're still QUITE love-able Tep...

Keep postin'...you ARE EXTREMELY valuable to our Lord...He loves you more than we can ever know.

26 posted on 02/24/2013 7:04:46 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Who else heavily contributed to the Book of Mormon?

Perhaps a better question is "What else heavily contributed to the BoM?"

27 posted on 02/24/2013 7:30:48 PM PST by Zakeet (Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage - Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conserv8

Huh?

The Book of Mormon is fiction with absolutely zero archaeological evidence for its basis.


28 posted on 02/24/2013 8:35:31 PM PST by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Actually, I read Freerepublic for political content, and when I come across your postings I basically respond to your hypocracy and move on.

There is no spirit of Christ in your postings ... never has been.

I could go tit for tat with you, and I have in the past, but usually you just regurgitate inuendo, distortion, and smears about people who aren’t alive to defend themselves.

Your generally so easy to respond to its pathetic.

For instance your insistance that early LDS polygamy was a sign of deviancy from God

... of course until I pointed out that the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” was the god of al least two confirmed polygamists and most likely three.

Your and Tennessee Nana’s brilliant response was that you believed in Jesus Christ ... not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob .....

Hardly worth responding to stunning intellect like that.


29 posted on 02/24/2013 9:50:47 PM PST by teppe (... for my God ... for my Family ... for my Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: teppe; Colofornian

Your and Tennessee Nana’s brilliant response was that you believed in Jesus Christ ... not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
____________________________________

Teepe, ye must have forgotten to PING me when ye mentioned my name...

Im sure it was an oversight...

Meanwhile, as ye didnt give C a link to the past comments of ours that ye referenced I dont know what ye may have been suggesting..

however on the words ye used, YES...

As the LORD Jesus Christ is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (and believe it) I would have indeed given ye what ye would have regarded as a ‘brilliant response’ having little of the same experience derived from thou usual choice of reading material...

The LORD Jesus Christ is God...

I liveth to serve ye exciting news for thou starving spirit..


30 posted on 02/25/2013 4:15:22 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: teppe
For instance your insistance that early LDS polygamy was a sign of deviancy from God

... of course until I pointed out that the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” was the god of al least two confirmed polygamists and most likely three.

Your and Tennessee Nana’s brilliant response was that you believed in Jesus Christ ... not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob .....

Well, Teppe, you weren't talking to me on the above, 'cause I've responded to the Abraham, Isaac and Jacob polygamy contention quite frequently on various threads (to other posters) in quite distinctive ways...and NEVER that I don't believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (because I do).

See what I mean, tho, Tep?

You dialogue so little you can't even recall one with me correctly.

There have been a NUMBER of other posters who would ask me, "Well, would you not vote for a Jewish candidate then?" (re: Romney the Mormon discussions). My standard response -- one I've given over a DOZEN times on FR -- is that with most Jewish candidates, their God is the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob...and, at least (unlike most Mormons)...we worship the SAME God.

Teppe, Isaac was NEVER a polygamist. The Bible knows only Rebekah as Isaac's wife. It was Joseph Smith trying to justify polygamy to Emma that he slipped his name into D&C 132.

As for Jacob, we all know the story of how he became a polygamist: Downright deception by his father-in-law. You wouldn't want to claim as your "prototype" for polygamy somebody where deception was the foundation, would you?

(Well Joseph Smith did...but we know he was in good company as a deceiver himself)

Anyway, Gen. 30 shows Jacob sleeping with both his wife's handmaidens as being pregnancy-rivalry based (see Gen. 30:1 and following)...it could hardly be described as a healthy household at that time.

Oh, and speaking of Jacob, 'tis good to know that you have apparently rejected the Book of Jacob in the Book of Mormon...well, at least those verses there that reject polygamy:

Polygamy and concubinage is described as less "righteous" (Jacob 3:5), an "abomination" (Jacob 2:24) with concubines "zeroed" out? (Jacob 2:27; 3:5): "...concubines ye shall have none..." (Jacob 2:27)

"Behold, the Lamanites...are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our fathers--that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none... (Jacob 3:5) [cf. Ether 10:5]

As for Abraham, his final wife (Keturah) is listed in Genesis AFTER the listing for Sarah's death.

Beyond that, all you have to do is call the Biblical witnesses to the witness stand and hear what they have to say...because NOBODY beyond Sarai (Sarah) referenced her servant as a "wife" -- and then we only know of one time she did so before the servant slept with Abraham. In fact, we don't even know if Abraham had sex with Hagar more than once.

Read it all for yourself...as to who was still referencing Hagar as Sarah's servant (and NOT as Abraham's wife) AFTER Abraham had already slept with her:

Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)

Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Abraham, Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)

Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)

Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.

Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)

Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)
QSo, it's not recorded that you told Hagar to go back to Abraham, or to your husband Abraham?
A No

Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).

Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
A Yes.

Q Apostle, Paul How did the Holy Spirit lead you to interpret the Old Covenant as expressed through Abraham?
A For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother...Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:21-31)

Sorry, Teppe. Abraham NEVER calls Hagar his "wife" (or even his concubine) in the Bible. Nor does Moses. Nor does the apostle Paul in Galatians 4. Nor does the Angel of the Lord in the very chapter where all this is described.

And even a few years after Isaac's birth, Sarah is referencing her as that "slave woman" (Gen. 21:10) -- NOT as either an equal "wife" or even as a "concubine"!!!

(This is what happens Teppe when you fail to study the Bible)

31 posted on 02/25/2013 8:14:56 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

(Forgot to ping you to last post)


32 posted on 02/25/2013 8:16:14 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
... Book of Mormon expert ...

What I want to hear are words from experts on the Book of MORMON Doctrine; the Doctrines and Covenants and the extensive research into the writings that have produced all the rituals found performed in the vast number of MORMONism Temple found about the world.

33 posted on 02/25/2013 8:24:11 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
... Book of Mormon expert ...

What does one really need to know???

Hasn't HISTORY delivered enough material to us already?




"Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters. Then he would tell the writer and he would write it. Then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on. But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous. Thus was the hol [whole] translated."
---Joseph Knight's journal.


"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."
(History of the RLDS Church, 8 vols.
(Independence, Missouri: Herald House,1951),
"Last Testimony of Sister Emma [Smith Bidamon]," 3:356.

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
---(David Whitmer,
as published in the "Kansas City Journal," June 5, 1881,
and reprinted in the RLDS "Journal of History", vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.

In an 1885 interview, Zenas H. Gurley, then the editor of the RLDS Saints Herald, asked Whitmer if Joseph had used his "Peep stone" to do the translation. Whitmer replied:

"... he used a stone called a "Seers stone," the "Interpreters" having been taken away from him because of transgression. The "Interpreters" were taken from Joseph after he allowed Martin Harris to carry away the 116 pages of Ms [manuscript] of the Book of Mormon as a punishment, but he was allowed to go on and translate by use of a "Seers stone" which he had, and which he placed in a hat into which he buried his face, stating to me and others that the original character appeared upon parchment and under it the translation in English."


"Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone, Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin and when finished he would say 'Written,' and if correctly written that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used."
(Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses,"
reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881
in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87.)

In 1879, Michael Morse, Emma Smith's brother-in-law, stated:
 
 "When Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon [I] had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation. The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribes Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other wrote it down."
(W.W. Blair interview with Michael Morse,
Saints Herald, vol. 26, no. 12
June 15, 1879,  pp. 190-91.)


Joseph Smith's brother William also testified to the "face in the hat" version:
 
"The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God"
("A New Witness for Christ in America,"
Francis W. Kirkham, 2:417.)


"The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret was the same manner as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, while the book of plates were at the same time hid in the woods."
---Isaac Hale (Emma Smith's father's) affidavit, 1834.




34 posted on 02/25/2013 8:25:42 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Hasn't HISTORY delivered enough material to us already?


The "Caractors" are the only tangible evidence in existence related to Smith's story.
No gold plates, no brass plates, no peep stones, no Urim and Thummim...
only these "Caractors," not a single one of which is in the purported languages.



Smith's translation of the Caractors. According to Martin Harris (Joseph Smith - History, 1:64), "I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated,* and he said they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters."

Speak right up now in all truthfulness. Isn't it revealing how Smith started out making a stab at creating believable "caractors" but quckly gave up and produced nothing but squiggles, ending up wih a series of nothing more than crude little scribbles? Yet Professor Anthon supposedly translated them!

*Harris must have had two or three pieces of paper with him—one with characters and a translation of them (on the same paper or a separate one) and one with untranslated characters—quite likely the "Caractors." Some Mormon "scholars" have gone out on a limb, sawed it off, and knocked themselves out trying to translate from these true Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic characters a segment that would correspond with a verse from 1 Nephi.


Modern-day experts in Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic. In 1829, any knowledge of these languages possessed by U.S. scholars would have been rudimentary at best. Expertise in them has vastly improved since then. So go ahead, do it. Get any modern expert in these languages to identify which of these "Caractors" are Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac and Arabic. Better still, accept the claim of Mormon apologists that Anthon did indeed so testify and that his appraisal of the Caractors was correct. (Op. cit, pp. 73-75)

Save your money! Samples of Assyriac/Aramaic and Arabic writing:



 



What say you? Which of Smith's "Caractors" resemble the Assyriac and Arabic ones? No need to pay experts for their analysis. A child could accurately check this out. These writing systems have remained constant for well over 3000 years.


35 posted on 02/25/2013 8:27:15 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

36 posted on 02/25/2013 8:29:27 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle



 
THE FIRST BOOK OF NEPHI

HIS REIGN AND MINISTRY
CHAPTER 16
 
The wicked take the truth to be hard—Lehi’s sons marry the daughters of Ishmael—The Liahona guides their course in the wilderness—Messages from the Lord are written on the Liahona from time to time—Ishmael dies; his family murmur because of afflictions. Between 600 and 592 B.C.
 
 
 1 And it came to pass after I, Nephi, had made an end of speaking to my brethren, behold they said unto me: Thou hast declared unto us hard things, more than we are able to bear.
  2 And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken ahard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the bguilty taketh the ctruth to be hard, for it dcutteth them to the very center.
  3 And now my brethren, if ye were righteous and were willing to hearken to the truth, and give heed unto it, that ye might awalk uprightly before God, then ye would not murmur because of the truth, and say: Thou speakest hard things against us.
  4 And it came to pass I, Nephi, did exhort my brethren, with all diligence, to keep the commandments of the Lord.
  5 And it came to pass that they did ahumble themselves before the Lord; insomuch that I had joy and great hopes of them, that they would walk in the paths of righteousness.
  6 Now, all these things were said and done as my father dwelt in a tent in the avalley which he called Lemuel.
  7 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, took one of the adaughters of Ishmael to bwife; and also, my brethren took of the cdaughters of Ishmael to wife; and also dZoram took the eldest daughter of Ishmael to wife.
  8 And thus my father had fulfilled all the acommandments of the Lord which had been given unto him. And also, I, Nephi, had been blessed of the Lord exceedingly.
  9 And it came to pass that the voice of the Lord spake unto my father by night, and commanded him that on the morrow he should take his ajourney into the wilderness.
  10 And it came to pass that as my father arose in the morning, and went forth to the tent door, to his great astonishment he beheld upon the ground a round aball of curious workmanship; and it was of fine brass. And within the ball were two spindles; and the one bpointed the way whither we should go into the wilderness.
  11 And it came to pass that we did gather together whatsoever things we should carry into the wilderness, and all the remainder of our provisions which the Lord had given unto us; and we did take aseed of every kind that we might carry into the wilderness.
  12 And it came to pass that we did take our tents and depart into the wilderness, across the river Laman.
  13 And it came to pass that we traveled for the space of four days, nearly a south-southeast direction, and we did pitch our tents again; and we did call the name of the place aShazer.
  14 And it came to pass that we did take our bows and our arrows, and go forth into the wilderness to slay food for our families; and after we had slain food for our families we did return again to our families in the wilderness, to the place of Shazer. And we did go forth again in the wilderness, following the same direction, keeping in the most fertile parts of the wilderness, which were in the borders near the aRed Sea.
  15 And it came to pass that we did travel for the space of many days, aslaying food by the way, with our bows and our arrows and our stones and our slings.
  16 And we did follow the adirections of the ball, which led us in the more fertile parts of the wilderness.
  17 And after we had traveled for the space of many days, we did pitch our tents for the space of a time, that we might again rest ourselves and obtain food for our families.
  18 And it came to pass that as I, Nephi, went forth to slay food, behold, I did break my bow, which was made of fine asteel; and after I did break my bow, behold, my brethren were angry with me because of the loss of my bow, for we did obtain no food.
  19 And it came to pass that we did return without food to our families, and being much fatigued, because of their journeying, they did suffer much for the want of food.
  20 And it came to pass that Laman and Lemuel and the sons of Ishmael did begin to murmur exceedingly, because of their sufferings and afflictions in the wilderness; and also my father began to murmur against the Lord his God; yea, and they were all exceedingly sorrowful, even that they did amurmur against the Lord.
  21 Now  it came to pass that I, Nephi, having been afflicted with my brethren because of the loss of my bow, and their bows having lost their asprings, it began to be exceedingly difficult, yea, insomuch that we could obtain no food.
  22 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did speak much unto my brethren, because they had hardened their hearts again, even unto acomplaining against the Lord their God.
  23 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did amake out of wood a bow, and out of a straight stick, an arrow; wherefore, I did arm myself with a bow and an arrow, with a sling and with stones. And I said unto my bfather: Whither shall I go to obtain food?
  24 And it came to pass that he did ainquire of the Lord, for they had bhumbled themselves because of my words; for I did say many things unto them in the energy of my soul.
  25 And it came to pass that the voice of the Lord came unto my father; and he was truly achastened because of his murmuring against the Lord, insomuch that he was brought down into the depths of sorrow.
  26 And it came to pass  that the voice of the Lord said unto him: Look upon the ball, and behold the things which are written.
  27 And it came to pass that when my father beheld the things which were awritten upon the ball, he did fear and tremble exceedingly, and also my brethren and the sons of Ishmael and our wives.
  28 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the pointers which were in the ball, that they did work according to the afaith and diligence and heed which we did give unto them.
  29 And there was also written upon them a new writing, which was plain to be read, which did give us aunderstanding concerning the ways of the Lord; and it was written and changed from time to time, according to the faith and diligence which we gave unto it. And thus we see that by bsmall means the Lord can bring about great things.
  30 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did go forth up into the top of the mountain, according to the adirections which were given upon the ball.
  31 And it came to pass that I did slay wild abeasts, insomuch that I did obtain food for our families.
  32 And it came to pass that I did return to our tents, bearing the beasts which I had slain; and now when they beheld that I had obtained afood, how great was their joy! And it came to pass that they did humble themselves before the Lord, and did give thanks unto him.
  33 And it came to pass that we did again take our journey, traveling nearly the same course as in the beginning; and after we had traveled for the space of many days we did pitch our tents again, that we might tarry for the space of a time.
  34 And it came to pass that aIshmael died, and was buried in the place which was called bNahom.
  35 And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did amourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father, and because of their bafflictions in the wilderness; and they did cmurmur against my father, because he had brought them out of the land of Jerusalem, saying: Our father is dead; yea, and we have wandered much in the wilderness, and we have suffered much affliction, hunger, thirst, and fatigue; and after all these sufferings we must perish in the wilderness with hunger.
  36 And thus they did murmur against my father, and also against me; and they were desirous to areturn again to Jerusalem.
  37 And Laman said unto Lemuel and also unto the sons of Ishmael: Behold, let us aslay our father, and also our brother Nephi, who has taken it upon him to be our bruler and our teacher, who are his elder brethren.
  38 Now, he says that the Lord has talked with him, and also that aangels have ministered unto him. But behold, we know that he lies unto us; and he tells us these things, and he worketh many things by his cunning arts, that he may deceive our eyes, thinking, perhaps, that he may lead us away into some strange wilderness; and after he has led us away, he has thought to make himself a king and a ruler over us, that he may do with us according to his will and pleasure. And after this manner did my brother Laman bstir up their hearts to canger.
  39 And it came to pass that the Lord was with us, yea, even the voice of the Lord came and did speak many words unto them, and did achasten them exceedingly; and after they were chastened by the voice of the Lord they did turn away their anger, and did repent of their sins, insomuch that the Lord did bless us again with food, that we did not perish.


37 posted on 02/25/2013 8:32:18 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
What I can’t understand is how this Skousen guy can be legitimately called a “specialist in linguistics and the English language” yet completely IGNORE the blatant and easily proven plagiarism in the BOM?

--MormonDude(If you were NOT such a HATEFUL bigot; you'd know that LEGITIMATE can mean a lot of things: especially to us MORMONs!)










38 posted on 02/25/2013 8:36:00 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
I liveth to serve ye exciting news for thou starving spirit..

 photo POSTOFTHEWEEK.jpg

39 posted on 02/25/2013 8:37:10 AM PST by greyfoxx39 (Thanks Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
Joseph Smith - Plagiarist, Scammer, Horndog, Adulterer, Cultist.



40 posted on 02/25/2013 8:37:44 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
I'm an expert on rituals. First time I was ritualized it was at the frat house at USU in Logan, Utah in the spring of 1960 when I became an active member of Sigma Alpha Everybody. Then in that very fall of 1960 I was once again ritualized in the big house in SLC.

Guess what? All the handshakes many of the words and much of the ritual was identical. What a coincidence. I just knew it was so trooooooo.

41 posted on 02/25/2013 8:41:39 AM PST by Utah Binger (Southern Utah Mood is Fine Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Skousen has no doubt poured over this written record. In the link I provide in post #19, Skousen even knows how many times "it came to pass" was edited out of the 1837 revision of the Book of Mormon (47x).

WHAT!!??!!

I thought the BoM was PERFECT!!!!!


Is nothing sacred any more??


The Prophet Joseph Smith taught,
 
 'Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed.' 
 
http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b788b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=da135f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
 
 
 

42 posted on 02/25/2013 8:45:50 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: teppe
Colofornain, Does your life have no positive purpose and direction?

Teppe; is all you do is ACCUSE folks without producing evidence?

And then have the gall to question THEM on completely off-the-wall subjects??

43 posted on 02/25/2013 8:47:31 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
Perhaps a better question is "What else heavily contributed to the BoM?"

It appears, from your picture, that Dapper Dan had a big influence!

44 posted on 02/25/2013 8:48:36 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
The Book of Mormon is fiction with absolutely zero archaeological evidence for its basis.

Son; you need to take a cruise!


http://bountifultravel.com/book-of-mormon-tours/

45 posted on 02/25/2013 8:50:18 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
Joseph Smith - Plagiarist, Scammer, Horndog, Adulterer, Cultist.

You left out pedophile.

46 posted on 02/25/2013 8:54:33 AM PST by greyfoxx39 (Thanks Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: teppe
I could go tit for tat with you, and I have in the past, but usually you just regurgitate inuendo, distortion, and smears about people who aren’t alive to defend themselves.

Then why don't YOU defend them?

Actually SHOW these inuendoes, distortions, and smears that are so apparent to you.

Else you are just letting the poor, defenseless READERs of the poor defenseless dead folks be confused by things that are so truthfully portrayed in these threads.

Do you not feel ANY obligation to correct these errors you've found?

Shame on you for allowing this "C" person to distort the record when YOU, teppe, could be doing MORMONism a HUGE favor by exposing YAHAMB on FR.

47 posted on 02/25/2013 8:55:11 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: teppe
... of course until I pointed out that the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” was the god of al least two confirmed polygamists and most likely three.

I remember that thread!!

And the fact you never responded on WHY that MORMONism's gods changed their minds and allowed WW to lead the church astray: away from the Eternal Covenant of POLYGAMY.

48 posted on 02/25/2013 8:57:26 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Bookmark.

49 posted on 02/25/2013 9:00:42 AM PST by moose07 (the truth will out ,one day. liberals and logic: Never confuse the two! Hi MI# !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Hasn't HISTORY delivered enough material to us already?

Well...

...sometimes 'history' can be confusing. After all, all them words tend to bog a fella's mind down so he cain't think too swell.

Perhaps a picture or two could illustrate the item in question a bit better: thousands words and all...


The following are the LYING images that MORMONism has produced, KNOWING that they represent something FALSE!!
 
 
   

50 posted on 02/25/2013 9:02:06 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson