Posted on 05/27/2010 6:44:33 AM PDT by Colofornian
And why not? If faith didn't have an actual landing place...for example, if somebody said the Son of God made a visit to earth somewhere in the Middle East, but never outlined where, how believable would that be?
Jesus born in Bethlethem vs. Jesus born somewhere out there???
From the article: Scott Gordon, president of FAIR..."We really don't care where he picks for his theory on where the Book of Mormon can take place," Gordon said.
(Oh, does that mean he can get out an entire map for South America, Central America, and North America, and play "Pin the tail on the donkey" blindfolded, and FAIR doesn't care??? Because there's no much Mormon authority contradictions and scant evidence...it doesn't really matter, anyway?)
Gordon of apologetics org FAIR, continuing: "What we care about that he is implying that the church is not following the teachings of Joseph Smith. Which means the church leadership, the prophet — everything is not following. And we think that is a very, very dangerous position."
Well, let's see. Smith seemed to point to Book of Mormon geography as landing somewhere in South America...and the Deseret News' host apologist, Michael Ash, along with BYU and the main Lds apologetics' folks have actually studied the Book of Mormon descriptions of lands, and realize how ludicrous Smith was to make such conclusions. But, they don't want to attack Joseph Smith. So they go after the people who quote him.
(That sounds like a common Mormon apologetic angle).
From the article: "They seem to be trying to elevate a question of lesser importance, Book of Mormon geography, to the level of the doctrines of the church," Roper said.
Can any of us imagine a Bible minus any definitive geography? What? They think an L. Ron Hubbard-style novel with sci-fi locales is just fine for presentation?
My feeling is that Joseph Smith did not lie,” Porter said.
_________________________________________
Feelings, nothing more than feelings...
Feelings, down in my heart...
(and it burns so bad I need a TUMS)
I've known people like that.
Fight? What is there to fight about? There is not one shred of evidence to support JS claims.
If they don't "hang their faith" on Jesus Christ, they are hell bound.
If Smith didn’t know; and if he knew his followers interpreted what he said as coming from his god, then, indeed, why would Smith tell people he knew?
From the article: If you don't agree with this line of reasoning, by implication, you think that Joseph lied.
Lie? No, I’d say the BYU folks; the FAIR folks; the DesNews folks try to be “charitable” toward Joseph Smith and think he was “mistaken.” But if Smith knew his followers interpreted what he said as coming from God; and he opened his mouth on the subject, when in fact, he didn’t know…then Smith was still deceiving people – even if one is “charitable” and thinks Smith was mistaken…
Deception doesn’t always hinge on intentionality. Smith was still a deceiver no matter how you look at it…Because he knew how his statements would be taken…as authoritatively from God.
You too ???
Selah
:)
Ahhh, the new tactics appears to be “It doesn’t really matter if the BoM has any proof (or even if it is false), Smith was STILL a prophet.
What they do not ‘get’ is that if Smith lied or conned about the BoM, then he probably lied
Mormonism is an ENTIRE package - History, doctrines, history of doctrines, pseudo-archaeology, crime, corruption, etc. They cannot separate those from their religion simply because they claim to be a ‘restored’ church - which means an entire denomination - that is the only one that has the truth. IOW, that Christ started a denomination. Either Smith was a prophet or he was a fraud. No way around that.
Christians, however, don’t have those issues. We recognize that our faith in Christ is separate from our ‘churches’.
If they don’t “hang their faith” on Jesus Christ, they are hell bound.
- - - -
AMEN!!!
if they knew where Mountain Meadows was, they would...
Nope...
They own the monument and land and wont let the victims families near it...
No. They still blame the Indians and John D. Lee (who was acting under orders by the Cedar City Bishop and possibly B. Young himself).
Why should they? That's like demanding white people today apologize because some white people in the past held blacks as slaves.
I'm not in favor of modern day people apologizing for stuff other people did in the past. It's just plain silly.
The bodies were left unburied for two years...
There is no doubt about where all those 140 unarmed men, women, children and babes-in-arms were murdered by the mormons...
The scapegoat for Briggy Young, John E Lee, was taken to the same spot to be executed 20 years later for the horrendous crime..
Any big shot calling himself a Prophet, Seer and Revelator should be able to get all the answers rather easily. Little Joey forgot to ask where those BOM places were. Like Obama he was a Messiah in his own mind.
By the way, this version by Nina Simone is Obambi perfect. PC lefties always care more than we do.
Apology issued Sept.12, 2007.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spalding–Rigdon_theory_of_Book_of_Mormon_authorship
The wiki is much more “balanced” than the study I learned many years ago. It is not surprising that a stolen manuscript would be different than existing manuscripts, but the book reads true.
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.