Posted on 07/07/2010 3:31:19 PM PDT by Colofornian
Hmmm, something to think about. And funny thing - Glenn Beck, a Mormon, is always pushing buying gold.
Well, he believes Mormonism is true and that's what they teach. Do the math.
First of all, while it's true that "the foundation myths" of religions generally make it into that religion's "sacred documents," -- like as you mentioned, the virgin birth written about in the Bible...
...and yes, it's "so" that Joseph Smith's "first vision" account was later "canonized" within Mormon "scriptures"...
...but this account we're talking about on this thread made it "nowhere" into Mormon's official, canonized "scriptures..." -- so to place it on the same level as the "virgin birth" is a bit off-kilter.
The foundation myths of all religions are ridiculous to the non-believer. This one is no stranger than the notion of virgin birth or a talking snake and a magic apple. If one doesn’t believe, it all sounds literally unbelievable; if one does believe it sounds like gospel truth, literally.
Allow me to quote Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason (& then apply his comment to yours):
Source of this excerpt: Miracles or Myths
This reminds me of a comment I heard yesterday in a discussion about religious issues on Dennis Prager's show here in Los Angeles, noting that Friday, yesterday was Good Friday and also Passover. He accurately pointed out that the Exodus and Resurrection are the defining events of two of the world's major religions. They are not the highest of holidays but they are the most defining events. Then he said something rather interesting. Dennis said that he has callers that talk about these kinds of things that are so pregnant with religious significance and meaning--the resurrection and the Passover--but have said to him, "I have a hard time taking these stories literally." Prager said, "So what? It is the meaning that is most important." This point of view reflects comments that were made a number of times in this article, that it is not so much whether the event actually happened or not, it's the story or the spiritual truth that is communicated through the message. I think this is a profound misunderstanding. It comes into play in my comments on the notion of myth.
A myth is not the same as a fairy tale. You need to know this. Oftentimes, we think of it that way, but that is not what a myth is. A myth is a story. It's not true in the same way that a fairy tale is not true, so they are similar in that way, but they have a different purpose. A fairy tale is simply meant to entertain. A myth is a story meant to communicate a truth of life. The message has deep significance for the mysteries of the meaning of life.
So it seems that people are not concerned about the historicity of the events in the Bible because what is more important is not that they happened, but that they teach this deep life truth. The resurrection teaches about new life in Jesus. The chances of new beginnings. Power over death. Life after death. That's what the message is. Whether Jesus rose from the dead or not is quite incidental to the message of the resurrection story. The message is paramount. I think this is a false view. Certainly the apostles didn't have the belief that the message was more paramount than the history itself. In fact, the message was in the history. Without the history, there is no message. That was their point. So this view ignores the statements of those who wrote the Bible themselves.
Before this, Koukl was commenting on a Time Magazine article describing miracles of the Bible, and Time presented these miracles as a "mystery" -- prompting Koukl to essentially ask why Time didn't simply ask whether these miracles happened or not? Why were they presented as a mystery if they really happened? Isn't it at least important to raise the Q if they occurred or not?
So...let's ask that Q as applied to these two accounts:
(a) Did the virgin birth occur in history?
(b) Did Smith run three miles at top speed hauling a few hundred pounds of solid gold around? And then did he "translate" a nobody-heard of language that he didn't know?
In answering (a) the series of Q are:
(1) Did the Biblical writers present the virgin birth as a historical account? (Answer: Yes)
(2) Did the Biblical writers seamlessly attribute the virgin birth to divine intervention? (Answer: Yes -- the Holy Spirit "overshadowed" her)
(3) And: was the virgin birth written in the same mythical religious style as other indigenous religions? (Answer: no)
(4) Do even Mormon "scriptures" like the Book of Mormon claim the Virgin birth to be true? (Answer: yes)
Now let's compare these same similar series of Q to answering (b)...the series of Q being:
(1) Do the Mormon "scriptures" talk about Joseph's account of running with these gold plates -- the subject of this thread? (Answer: No...it was in other Mormon documents that even Mormons don't elevate as special sacred status)
(2) Does this "History of the Church" account attribute divine intervention for Smith that allowed him to run that fast carrying something that heavy -- hence giving glory to God and not man? (Answer: No)
(3) And: was this Mormon account written in the same mythical religious style as other indigenous religions -- as Irish leprachauns who were competing for buried treasure? (Answer: Yes: Traveling some distance after he left the road, he came to a large windfall, and as he was jumping over a log, a man sprang up from behind it, and gave him a heavy blow with a gun. Joseph turned around and knocked him down, then ran at the top of his speed. About half a mile further he was attacked again in the same manner as before; he knocked this man down in like manner as the former, and ran on again; and before he reached home he was assaulted the third time. Source: History of Joseph Smith by His Mother, Lucy Smith, pp.107-108).
(4) Do even Christian historical documents provide any reinforcement to Smith's claims about these gold plates? (Answer: no)
There ya go: You've got to dig deeper muir_redwoods if you're going to start comparing the foundation of Christmas to this Smith myth.
Was Moroni once a man, as we are?
picky, picky, picky...
So Smith said.
Trick question and you fell for it!
Inconceivable!
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is “never get involved in a land war in Asia” - but only slightly less well-known is this: “Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line”!
So in Luke 16:19-31 we learn that “...No one can cross the great Divide....” and that God has set it so as “`If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.’”
LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL....
I read a quote once by Mark Twain, about those "witnesses" but can't find it again.
I first heard this story over 25 years ago. Sounded far-fetched then, and still does. Too many questions.
LOL, I got it.
My response was ala the Princess Bride and the smartest man in the world...
Never seen it huh?
Look, the fact is that if Smith had really had gold plates his descriptions of what it was like to lift them — and “heft” them — would actually match reality. There would be no scampering through the woods with them under his arm like a football while being tackled by sundry neighborhood ruffians. We would have read a completely different story, one much more believable. The fact that Smith never had any gold plates, never saw any gold plates, never even spent much time thinking about the actual physical reality of gold plates leads to such nonsense as 3 mile charging sprints while packing gold plates.
Does Glenn Beck believe this stuff?Which brings up another question: Does Glenn Beck ever read FR?
I read a quote once by Mark Twain, about those "witnesses" but can't find it again.
From Mark Twain, Roughing It, Chapter XVI
And when I am far on the road to conviction, and eight men, be they grammatical or otherwise, come forward and tell me that they have seen the plates too; and not only seen those plates but "hefted" them, I am convinced. I could not feel more satisfied and at rest if the entire Whitmer family had testified.
I think the question is, do you have any proof, other than faith, that it was a virgin birth?
To a non-believer, it would sound rediculous to say that your Savior was conceived by a virgin, because it is not a natural possibility.
The same with a snake convincing someone to eat an apple. Unless you are a Hoodoo practioner, you probably dont believe in anthropomorphism. You have to have faith that this account is true, because so far, we have never recorded another animal talking to a person in a human language.
It is the same with Mormons. They have faith that their documentation is correct. They cant find the gold plates, we couldnt find Jesus’ body.
If you denegrate someone’s faith because you think it is silly, you have to be welcome to them doing the same to you.
I think the question is, do you have any proof, other than faith, that it was a virgin birth?
To a non-believer, it would sound rediculous to say that your Savior was conceived by a virgin, because it is not a natural possibility.
The same with a snake convincing someone to eat an apple. Unless you are a Hoodoo practioner or old world relion practioner, you probably dont believe in anthropomorphism. You definitely dont believe it if you are a purely rational thinker, using empiricism. You have to have faith that this account is true, because so far, we have never recorded another animal talking to a person in a human language.
It is the same with Mormons. They have faith that their documentation is correct. They cant find the gold plates, we couldnt find Jesus’ body.
If you denegrate someone’s faith because you think it is silly, you have to be welcome to them doing the same to you.
There’s over 500 liars in D.C. right now...........
Sam:
Why do you think that “faith” has only a vertical dimension? Isn’t “trust” a component of “faith?” If you worship at a local church, don’t you “trust” (to various degrees) what the pastor is saying? Isn’t that what one might call “horizontal” trust?
In the same way, when we are reading any writer of antiquity – and they are NOT writing in the language of myth – but conveying accounts as if they were eyewitnesses, do we not have the opportunities to extend trust (or distrust) in these accounts?
If you’re a juror in a case, and you are presented with written evidence by an eyewitness who is now deceased, are you thereby not weighing the “eyewitness testimony” of this person?
Are you telling us that all of this involves only a “me and God faith” thing – but that eyewitnesses bear no role in this process? If so, were you to serve as a juror in a trial case, would you only “pray” and exercise “faith” in God to determine the guilt or innocence of the person on trial?
Why would you exercise distinct standards in a trial by jury than scrutinizing the eyewitnesses who are recorded in the books of the Bible – including the very authors who wrote them? (You know the Bible is not simply one book; it’s 40 or so authors who wrote them).
It’s on this basis I claim: Ask any prosecuting attorney if eyewitnesses have been enough to convict somebody…even with lack of direct evidence. If you have such testimony, usually coupled with circumstantial evidence, and character witnesses attesting to the eyewitnesses, ‘tis enough to convict. And jurors don't convict people based upon "faith" or burning bosoms.
Sam, too often people neglect to treat the books of the Bible as written by eyewitnesses who are offering their testimony – and they are also reporting additional eyewitnesses. As such, people tend to treat eyewitnesses in courtroom trials – and hold them to distinct standards than they would eyewitness writers of history.
It is the same with Mormons. They have faith that their documentation is correct.
Well, now apply the above comments to Mormons. It’s not simply a “me and God ‘faith’” on this…
...just like the Bible and the eyewitnesses who recorded the historicity of it, we need to also review the eyewitnesses & secondary witnesses who recorded these events – like what is in the Mormon document, History of the Church.
We need to ask both is this a trustworthy (secondary) source?
And does the account stand up to its own consistency, etc.?
They cant find the gold plates, we couldnt find Jesus’ body.
Sorry, but Jesus’ “body” appeared to up to 500 witnesses before heading back to heaven. Most of the so-called “eyewitnesses” of these plates (like 2 of the top 3 witnesses) said they only “saw” the plates with “eyes of FAITH” – distinct than “eyewitness” testimony). Other “witnesses” mentioned in the article of this thread – like brother William Smith – also never actually “saw” the plates but supposedly picked them up covered by a pillowcase. (Who knows what may have been inside) Bottom line – unlike Jesus’ resurrection which was openly paraded by hundreds of people – these gold plates were sequestered away from just about all people.
Once again, you want to jump from Point A (grave to the sky in Jesus’ case; hiding place to the sky in Smith’s “gold plate” case) minus carefully weighing the horizontal dimension that occurred in the interim time between the two destinations. It just doesn’t work the way you've described. Yes, faith trumps reason; but God gave us reason. He is not expecting us to deny reason or be unreasonable. We know Pentecost (Acts 2) occurred 50 days after the resurrection. And we know the Ascension is recorded prior to that (Acts 1). It appears Jesus hung around for weeks before ascending; and it would have been necessary for these gold plates to have been around for years and years per Smith's tale. If Jesus' bodily resurrection could drum up enough eyewitnesses where the apostle Paul could later claim that none of what happened was done "in a corner," then it's not merely based upon a contemporary supernatural faith; there's a dimension that also includes historical events.
If you denegrate someone’s faith because you think it is silly, you have to be welcome to them doing the same to you.
I am saying examine this the same way a jury would examine a case.
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.