Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Oct 12, 2011 Full story: CNN 32,002

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

Full Story

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#13923 Aug 22, 2012
Dana Robertson wrote:
Consequently, Nephi claimed that he "took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword." (verse 18) Even though this would seem to have created a rather bloody mess, Nephi said that "after I had smitten off his head... I took the garments of Laban and put them upon mine own body; yea, even every whit; and I did gird on his armor about my loins." (verse 19)
Nephi then proceeded "unto the treasury of Laban." On the way he "saw the servant of Laban who had the keys of the treasury. And I commanded him in the voice of Laban that he should go with me into the treasury. And he supposed me to be his master, Laban, for he beheld the garments and also the sword girded about my loins.... And I spake unto him as if it had been Laban. And I also spake unto him that I should carry the engravings, which were upon the plates of brass, to my elder brethren, who were without the walls.... And it came to pass that when the servant of Laban beheld my brethren he began to tremble... And now I, Nephi, being a man large in stature... therefore I did seize upon the servant of Laban, and held him, that he should not flee. And it came to pass that I spake with him... that if he would hearken unto our words, we would spare his life.... And it came to pass that we took the plates of brass and the servant of Laban, and departed into the wilderness, and journeyed unto the tent of our father." (1 Nephi 4:21, 23-24, 30-32, 38)
The reader will notice that in the quotation given above Nephi used the words "of the treasury." While this three-word phrase is never found in the King James Bible, it does appear in 2 Maccabees 3:40.
A person might wonder what caused Joseph Smith to link the plates of brass with a treasury. The answer may be found in 1 Maccabees 14:48-49:
"So they commanded that this writing should be put in tables of brass, and that they should be set up within the compass of the sanctuary in a conspicuous place; Also that the copies thereof should be laid up in the treasury, to the end that Simon and his sons might have them."
While this reference does not specifically state what the "copies" were written on, the original was written on brass plates, and this certainly could have led Joseph Smith to write a story concerning plates of brass in the treasury of Laban. Interestingly, this reference (1 Maccabees 14:48-49) is found only about two pages before the book of 2 Maccabees, which contains the story of Heliodorus's attempt to plunder the treasury in Jerusalem.
It would appear, then, that Joseph Smith borrowed from both First Maccabees and Second Maccabees in creating this tale. The reader will notice, however, that Smith has turned the story around somewhat. While the Apocrypha has an ungodly man failing in his attempt to plunder the treasury at Jerusalem, the Book of Mormon states that it was a servant of God who tricked Laban's servant into allowing him to take the "plates of brass" from the treasury. Significantly, in both stories it is the ungodly who are brought to the ground -- one is beheaded and the other "lay ready to give up the ghost." It really comes as no surprise that in both cases the godly prevailed against the wicked.
More at: http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no89.htm
There is nothing original in the BoM.
All of that was interesting. But you realize there are more similarities between the Christian Jesus and a actual Jew of the same name the Hebrews/Jews viewed as a holy rabbi that healed and did supposed miricles?
Did you know there are more factual similarities between the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh and the OT stories then Smith and the BOM being compared to your mentioned sources (except the Bible)? Did you know that? Did you know there are more factual similarities between the Catholic trinity theory and the pre-existing trinity teachings of Egyptian and Greek gods then Smiths beliefs of God being compared to the old gnostic teachings of God?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#13924 Aug 22, 2012
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
The cities wouldn't have been made of metal, but stone. And some Indians buried their dead in stone. Artifacts and at least the stones would still be here.
Umm, you aren't paying attention to your own conversation. You went from why meatal weapons weren't found the Nephites used in battle to talking about metal cities? Where did that statement come from? Been reading Revelations that speak of god's kingdom being made of gold and get confused with your own line of reasoning?
I was referencing the BOM stories of the Nephites using metal weapons in the last several battles some supposed 1600 years ago.
Those weapons left where they lay, would have been covered with dirt/soil over time. They would decay and lose their original shapes and to someone discovering them while plowing land, they would appear to be odd rusted clumps of metal to a farmer in the early 1800s. Understand?

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#13925 Aug 22, 2012
Interesting fact...

The information and maps available to us today (books, Internet, archeological finds... etc)

were just simply unavailable in the 1830s.

Yet, how is it so that Joseph Smith in 1830's could pin point every single location in the Book of Mormon from site to site in Meso America that were not uncovered until the 1950's or later?

Also, how is it that he would know that only a very few people in Lehi's day had the knowledge to write in Egytian Hieroglyphics the words that were spoken in Hebrew?

This was known to Joseph Smith? How?

Also, it has been mapped out Lehi's groups trip to the sea,(from artifacts from archeological finds)... WHAT? Still NO INTERNET.

How did Jospeh Smith a uneducated man know all this stuff?

hmmm... I suppose he was just guessing or copied it from other books.

NO... though, this is what you would like others to believe because it continues the hatred and it continues the opportunity to get vengence on the Church...

It is DISGUSTING the limits one will go to, to prove this circle of coniving, manipulating, vile, impotent lies.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13926 Aug 22, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
All of that was interesting. But you realize there are more similarities between the Christian Jesus and a actual Jew of the same name the Hebrews/Jews viewed as a holy rabbi that healed and did supposed miricles?
Did you know there are more factual similarities between the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh and the OT stories then Smith and the BOM being compared to your mentioned sources (except the Bible)? Did you know that? Did you know there are more factual similarities between the Catholic trinity theory and the pre-existing trinity teachings of Egyptian and Greek gods then Smiths beliefs of God being compared to the old gnostic teachings of God?
If you really believe that, why are you Mormon? Because if the Bible is, certainly Mormonism is all wrong. Justify yourself.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#13927 Aug 22, 2012
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm, you aren't paying attention to your own conversation. You went from why meatal weapons weren't found the Nephites used in battle to talking about metal cities? Where did that statement come from? Been reading Revelations that speak of god's kingdom being made of gold and get confused with your own line of reasoning?
I was referencing the BOM stories of the Nephites using metal weapons in the last several battles some supposed 1600 years ago.
Those weapons left where they lay, would have been covered with dirt/soil over time. They would decay and lose their original shapes and to someone discovering them while plowing land, they would appear to be odd rusted clumps of metal to a farmer in the early 1800s. Understand?
You say they discovered some, yet all you can give as prove is something you read 30 years ago. If there were any validity to the story, some Mormon would have preserved it and would have kept retelling it. Hell, they do that for the lies they hold on to like the phony "17 point" story which is pure fiction. And yes, while many ancient weapons would have turned to rust and dust, a minor portion would have still survived as proven to what has been preserved and are still being found, even in the jungles of South America.
BeckerBob

Scranton, PA

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

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

Do you think you are God or something?

That is just tacky and tasteless.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

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

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

To be continued...

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

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

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

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

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

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

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

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

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

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

"•Joseph spelling out unfamiliar Book of Mormon names;

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

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

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

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

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

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

Draper, UT

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

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Duty is a Privilege! ”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

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

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

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

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
LDS Apostle visited Tonga (Feb '14) 1 hr Dana Robertson 23,561
Noteworthy paperbacks Nov 24 Kid_Tomorrow 1
Pastafarian former porn star Asia Lemmon allowe... Nov 21 tha Professor 1
America's shift in attitude toward gays started... Nov 18 Abrahammock Regions 29
Church: Mormon founder wed 40 wives Nov 14 Peter 4
Mormon Church Admits Founder Joseph Smith Had U... Nov 13 Lul 1
A Mormon in the Donbass militia: 'A volunteer's... Nov 10 Zeppelin 2

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE