Mormons

[Big ned]

Blackmore is not part of the mainstream LDS religion. This is where you people are all confused. They started their own little "commune" (which makes me wonder if BA isn't refering to the same group the way he explains "free"housing and commune).
The mainstream church denounced polygamy in 1890... anyone who tries to practise it today is excommunicated from the church.

So, BA.. your mother joined the church when you are a kid and you are trying to tell me what the belief system is when I have been a member for decades... I have read the church handbook for leaders and I can tell you that there is nothing official on caffeine. If you become addicted to the substance, you are not living the word of wisdom, but that goes for anything... junk food, sugar, meat etc. The article you quote is not by anyone who has an official capacity to pronounce policy. That is why there is a prophet and quorum of 12 apostles... the person that wrote that article is neither. Opinion pure and simple. No one gets kicked out of the church for drinking coke and no one loses their temple recommend (which is the highest standing in the church) for drinking coke. Period. You can keep banging your head against the wall, but those are the facts.

You are right, there are some households that decide not to have those things in the house, but that is a personal decision and not doctrine.

[Big ned]

I noticed that several people piped up about polygamy in the Bible. There are two very famous examples. Jacob from whom the twelve tribes come from had at least 3 wives. You can check it out in Genesis 29 starting about verse 21. How could Jacob be such a great man in the Lord's sight if he was commiting adultery? The answer.. it was sanctioned of God. Why was it sanctioned? To raise up a righteous posterity to the Lord ie. The house of Israel.

Also, King david. During the time that he was considered a great man, he had more than one wife. It wasn't until he went outside of his marriage covenants and laid with Bathesheba that the Lord condemned him.

Two very obvious examples.

[Born_again]

From what I can see, the bible is both for and against polygamy.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/interp/polygamy.html

[bcbudrockz69]

im no0t sure id want more than one wife lol

[Big ned]

You got that right. I've got my hands full with one (unintended pun).

The Bible is for polygamy when it is sanctioned by God... otherwise it is a sin. Pretty simple.

[suburbangurl]

I have to say reading the thread has been most interesting.

I was raised Mormon and can say I never lived in 'community housing' or was pushed around to different families. My family was very close, and in our house that was important. We did not drink caffeine or really much soda, not because caffeine was forbidden it just is not that great for you. I am glad now, because I can start my day just fine without a cup of coffee, I feel bad for all those co-workers who are so dependent on the stuff. I can remember being sick once as a child and having a lung infection of some sort and what did my mom give me, caffeine in the some cola, as anyone knows caffeine is a stimulant. I was not kicked out or ostracized. We were taught that our bodies were temples and to treat them that way. Looking at the world around me now and seeing people who are so unhealthy and dependant on caffeine or junk food, I think I am lucky.

I look at my family now and think I am thankful for my Mormon upbringing, even though I do not attend church often anymore. I have a great relationship with my children and spouse, not because I am Mormon but because of the values they teach and they were taught at home. I think I have less worries in my relationship than some people I know because I have high values and value my relationship and family and I expect those same values and morals from my family. As I said I do not attend church however still maintain strong friendships with other Mormons. I am not shunned by my family or friends.

None of this is really has much to do with what Joseph Smith did or how the golden plates were found and translated or how the church started, but the world really is a greater place because of people who are Mormon and belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (not church of LDS- which even I who is no longer a regular attendee, still remember that is what the church is called).

My post may be all over the place and answer no questions, but I hate to see people ignorantly chastise a church or religion they know very little about. If you really want to know what Mormons are about, ask a friend about it! I bet you may be surprise who you find in your life who is Mormon.

Way to go Big Ned, it is people like you, who will hopefully provide some light to those who have been mislead about the life of Mormons. Not trying to convert the world, but maybe give people a real perspective of what the teachings of the LDS church is all about. People tend to make fun adn judge those things they fear or do not understand. I may not attend church often anymore, but keep the values I learnt at home from parents who thought the teachings of the church to be of value.

[Born_again]

This is good news; two apologetics in one spot. I kind of felt sorry for Big ned because he was a lone voice in the wilderness up until now.

Anyway, ......

None of this is really has much to do with what Joseph Smith did or how the golden plates were found and translated or how the church started, ....

I'm glad you have brought this up, as I have just a few queries about the church's origins, and indeed Joe smith. (Surprise, surprise?)

I'll start with a 'loaded' question by asking if it is agreeable that I reference the 1830(original) publication of The Book of Mormon(including the original manuscript and the printer's manuscript), and all the circumstances surrounding it? I believe this would be most equitable because I'd rather save the apologetics's breath with all the, "oh, that's man's intervention/interpretation that's responsible for that edit" baloney.

So, is it agreeable that all references to the Book of Mormon should be to the untainted, unabridged, unadulterated, unedited, unsullied, guileless, uncorrupted, unstained, undefiled, unspotted version as a factual historical document, idem quod "The Book of Mormon; an account written by the hand of Mormon upon plates taken from the plates of Nephi (1830)[Palmyra of N.Y., Printed by E.B. Grandin for the author]"?

[Big ned]

Thanks afitzgerald. You are right. I am not here to convert anyone, simply to clear up misconceptions. It is people like born again that think they have a gotcha moment that will somehow disillusion 13 million people into questioning their faith. The church has been around for about 150 years and people have been trying to tear it apart from the beginning... sorry BA even using the original manuscripts isn't going to make a difference.

The LDS church does a lot of good in the world and the people that belong to it have strong faith in God. For the the ten or so people that read this thread, I think I may be the only Mormon and you certainly won't be showing me anything new... I seek out anti mormon literature in order to find answers to questions that arise.

[Born_again]

What did your 'seeking' tell you about the following book?
View of the Hebrews : exhibiting the destruction of Jerusalem; the certain restoration of Judah and Israel; the present state of Judah and Israel; and an address of the prophet Isaiah relative to their restoration (1823)
Have you read it, Big ned? I have just finished it, and I must say that the BOM's resemblance is uncanny! No, it's beyond uncanny!! There is no way an objective and rational human could put the striking resemblance down to 'mere coincidence', is there, Big ned?
Hmm, it looks as though one Smith was defrauding the other Smith; and consequentially some 13 million others.

[Big ned]

Quite simply that you had better go back and read the book of Mormon then because there are no similartities what so ever.

THis book you just read is a person going through the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah and other prophets of the time and showing how some of their prophecies have come to pass and putting forth ideas on what some of the "yet to be fulfilled" prophecies might be.

The Book of Mormon is a history of a people who left Jerusalem about the time of Jeremiah (so they had the writings of Isaiah) and established themselves in the Americas. The only similarity I see is the occassional quoting of Isaiah. Your book talks about reestablishing Palestine as the promised land and the Book of Mormon calls the americas the promised land.... pretty for off if you ask me.

The Book of Mormon talks of Christ teaching the people in the America... Is america even mentioned in your book? Apart from the present situation of the Jews? The fact that this guy guesses at the amercan aboriginies may be a descendent of the Hebrews should lend credibility to that possibility.

Sorry, you will have to point out any parrallels, because I'm just not seeing them. Although I think it would be good for any interested party to read both books and draw their own conclusion. The Book of Mormon is about 8 times longer than the one you purport reveals a fraud... not even the length is similar.

[Mr Danksworth]

The Book of Mormon is a history of a people who left Jerusalem about the time of Jeremiah (so they had the writings of Isaiah) and established themselves in the Americas.

You really should be a comedian Ned, you are too funny.

[bcbudrockz69]

Quite simply that you had better go back and read the book of Mormon then because there are no similartities what so ever.

THis book you just read is a person going through the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah and other prophets of the time and showing how some of their prophecies have come to pass and putting forth ideas on what some of the "yet to be fulfilled" prophecies might be.

The Book of Mormon is a history of a people who left Jerusalem about the time of Jeremiah (so they had the writings of Isaiah) and established themselves in the Americas. The only similarity I see is the occassional quoting of Isaiah. Your book talks about reestablishing Palestine as the promised land and the Book of Mormon calls the americas the promised land.... pretty for off if you ask me.

The Book of Mormon talks of Christ teaching the people in the America... Is america even mentioned in your book? Apart from the present situation of the Jews? The fact that this guy guesses at the amercan aboriginies may be a descendent of the Hebrews should lend credibility to that possibility.

Sorry, you will have to point out any parrallels, because I'm just not seeing them. Although I think it would be good for any interested party to read both books and draw their own conclusion. The Book of Mormon is about 8 times longer than the one you purport reveals a fraud... not even the length is similar.

the only problem i see with this , it never happened

[Born_again]

Firstly, thank you for replying. I must admit that I'm surprised that you did so considering that I have already stated that my questions will be "leading questions". Based on your response I'm going to show restraint, as clearly the research that I have carried out does not overlap with the sources from which you have drawn your own dismissive conclusions, if there were sources at all?

Quite simply that you had better go back and read the book of Mormon then because there are no similartities what so ever.

I just want to record this for posterity, as edited comments can lead to confusion.

The Book of Mormon is a history of a people who left Jerusalem about the time of Jeremiah (so they had the writings of Isaiah) and established themselves in the Americas. The only similarity I see is the occassional quoting of Isaiah. .....

.....The fact that this guy guesses at the amercan aboriginies may be a descendent of the Hebrews

Okay, we could easily see where I could go with such a contradiction, so I'll ignore it and move on.

The Book of Mormon is about 8 times longer than the one you purport reveals a fraud... not even the length is similar.

Let's not jump the gun, Big ned. So far I have only mentioned one of the books that Joe Smith plagiarised or drew heavily from; there are more to come[spoiler alert!]. If you can afford me some patience I will account for the remaining 'gaps' in good time. In order that we can fully appreciate each others understanding of the topic I would prefer to take it step by step, or bite-sized chunks if you like, so as to give readers a fair chance to confirm or deny any background evidence or theories that lead to our respective conclusions. Does that sound fair to you?

Anyway, we digress. Was the concept of the colonisation of the Americas by Hebrews prior to Columbus' arrival(or even the Vikings) novel prior to the publication of View of the Hebrews in 1823? No, it certainly was not! In fact, during and prior to the period that Joe Smith and fellow fraudsters wrote the BoM, there were many publications related to that theme.

The following is a partial list of such stories published prior to 1830:

Adair, James, The History of the American Indians, London, 1775.

* Adair’s evidence for the Indian-Israelite theory consists of twenty-three parallels between Indian and Jewish customs. For example, he claims the Indians spoke a corrupt form of Hebrew, honored the Jewish Sabbath, performed circumcision, and offered animal sacrifice.

Boudinot, Elias, A Star in the West; or a Humble Attempt to Discover the Long Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, Trenton, 1816.

* He relies heavily on evidences compiled by James Adair. He also mentions the Indians’ lost book of God.

Burke, Edmund, An Account of the European Settlements in America, 2 vol. 2nd ed., London, 1758 — many editions including one in 1808.

* Mentions the Mexican and Peruvian temples.

Cusick, David, Sketches of the Ancient History of the Six Nations, Lewistone, NY, 1827.

* Records Indian fables, which he believes, support the mound builder myth. One fable, for example, speaks of the descendants of two brothers continually at war with the other until one group is finally destroyed in North America.

Flint, Timothy, Recollections of the Last Ten Years, Passed in Occasional Residences and Journeyings in the Valley of the Mississippi, Boston, 1826.

* He mentions the idea that the Indians were Jewish but does not commit himself on the subject. He describes various burial mounds and fortifications of North America and mentions the discovery of mammoth bones and stone coffins.

Haywood, John, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, Nashville, 1823.

* Compares American antiquities with those of Hindus, Egyptians, and Hebrews. He describes North American fortifications and Mexican temples, use of metals, including steel, copper and brass plates, describes stone boxes, possible use of the wheel and horse in ancient America, and concludes that the mound builders were a white people destroyed by the Indians.

Humboldt, Alexander, three different books on American Indian; one 4 vol. set was titled Political Essay on the Kingdom of New Spain. Baltimore, 1813.

* Describes Mexican fortifications and temples, use of metals.

Imlay, George, A Topographical Description of the Western Territory of North America, London, 1793.

* Discusses, among other things, the practice of the mound builders to bury their dead in stone boxes.

Israel, Manasseh ben, The Hope of Israel, London, 1652 and 1792.

* Includes story of a remnant of the ten tribes of Israel being discovered in Peru.

Juarros, Domingo, A Statistical and Commercial History of the Kingdom of Guatemala, London, 1823.

* Claims Indians from the Old World, claims original inhabitants arrived in the New World shortly after the dispersion from the tower of Babel, describes Guatemalan fortifications, buildings, temples, and palaces, including the ruins of Palenque.

Loudon, Archibald, A Selection of Some of the Most Interesting Narratives of Outrages Committed by the Indians, in Their Wars with the White People, 2 vols. Carlisle, PA, 1811.

* He supports the ten tribe theory, mentions that the Spaniards dug up Indian tombstones covered with Hebrew characters, and compares Peruvian temples to Jewish synagogues.

McCulloh, James H., Researches on America; Being an Attempt to Settle Some Points Relative to the Aborigines of America &c., Baltimore, 1817.

* Discusses various theories explaining Indian origins, problems of transoceanic crossing, and discusses the theory that the mound builders were a white group more advanced than the Indians.

Mather, Cotton, India Christiana. A Discourse, Delivered unto the Commissioners, for the Propagation of the Gospel among the American Indians, Boston, 1721.

* Suggests that those in the Old World could have sailed to America.

Mather, Samuel, An Attempt to Shew, that America Must Be Known to the Ancients, Boston, 1773.

* He believes that America was populated by two major migrations, one from the tower of Babel and the other, centuries later, from Asia or possibly Phoenicia. He also subscribes to the theory that ancient America was visited by Christ's apostles or perhaps by some of the seventy.

Mills, Nicholas, History of Mexico, London, 1824.

* Describes Mexican pyramids and compares them with those of Egypt.

Moulton, William, A Concise Extract, from the Sea Journal of William Moulton, Utica, NY, 1804.

* He describes his visits to ruined Peruvian cities with "large palaces" and "elegant buildings" and Incan highways running over a thousand miles.

Niles, John Milton, A View of South America and Mexico, New York, 1825 (various ed. after that).

* Describes palaces and temples in Peru.

Parrish, Elijah, A New System of Modern Geography, Newburyport, MA, 1810.

* Parrish wrote his geography for use in New England schools. He describes mounds in North America and the Peruvian temple at Cusco. Includes a comparison of Indian and Israelite customs.

Poinsett, Joel Roberts, Notes on Mexico, Made in the Autumn of 1822, Philadelphia, 1824.

* Mentions the Mexican tradition of the Flood, notes their immense pyramids and long paved roads, and mentions their hieroglyphic drawings and knowledge of astronomy and metallurgy.

Priest, Josiah, The Wonders of Nature and Providence, Displayed, Albany, 1825 and 1826.

* A compilation of many previously published works, includes an extract from Francisco Clavigero's History of Mexico recounting the ancient Mexican traditions of idolatry and human sacrifice and a portion from Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews detailing evidence that Indians were of Hebrew origin.

Rio, Antonio del, Description of the Ruins of an Ancient City, Discovered Near Palenque, in the Kingdom of Guatemala, London, 1822.

* Rio describes various ruins at Palenque, includes plates of some of the structures, several Mayan codices. He suggests that the ancient Americans came by sea. He also mentions the tradition of an eclipse in AD 34 and speculates that the Mexican god Quetzalcoatl was St. Thomas preaching the gospel in ancient America.

Sewall, Samuel, Phaenomena Quaedam Apocalyptica, Boston, 1697 and 1727.

* Suggests that the Indians are Israelites, that America might be the place of the New Jerusalem, and that the 'other sheep' mentioned in John 10:16 are the American Indians.

Smith, Ethan, View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of Israel in America, Poultney, VT, 1823 and 1825.

* Ethan Smith's is by far the most important and interesting work dealing with the origin of the American Indians and the mound builders. Suggests that the first settlers of the New World were the lost ten tribes of Israel. Includes extracts from von Humboldt's description of Mexican antiquities, Atwater's description of the mounds, and evidence from Adair and Boudinot to connect Indians with the lost ten tribes. He also mentions the Indian legend of the lost book of God, which would one day be returned.

Sullivan, James, The History of the District of Main, Boston, 1795.

* He maintains the Ohio fortifications were built by people from Mexico and Peru because North American Indians did not possess the knowledge to construct them.

Thorowgood, Thomas, Jews in America, or , Probabilities That the Americans are of that Race, London, 1652.

* He mentions the notion that the gospel was anciently preached in America. Emphasized the millennialistic nature of his Indian-Israelite identification and the importance of the Indians' conversion to Christianity.

Walton, William, Present State of the Spanish Colonies, 2 vols. London, 1810.

* Mentions the Indian belief in the Creation and Flood and includes a description of Mexican architecture and metalwork.

Williams, Roger, A Key into the Language of America, Boston, 1827.

* He believes that Indian language is a form of Hebrew and that their customs resemble those of the Jews. Although he is tolerant of the Indians, Williams believes their religion is devil inspired.

Williams, Samuel, The Natural and Civil History of Vermont, Burlington, VT, 1809.

* Discusses various theories of Indian origins. Mentions the discovery of mammoth bones in North America.

Worsley, Israel, A View of the American Indians, London, 1828.

* Relies heavily on Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews. Believes mound builders had been destroyed by the Indians, mentions the discovery of large stone crosses in Central America and records the Indian tradition of a lost book of God.

Yates, John and Joseph Moulton, History of the State of New York, 1824.

* They describe mounds and fortifications in their state and neighboring states, as well as the ruins of an ancient city near Palenque. According to them, these mounds, part of a great chain running down through Mexico and into South America, were built by a separate race of white-skinned people who were destroyed by the Indians. They mention the discovery of hieroglyphic writing and mammoth bones, and include reports that Indians in certain locales possessed the signs and tokens of Freemasonry.

That is a partial list!!

I would hope that you would agree that the 'idea' was certainly not novel in Joe Smith's time; in fact I'd strongly argue that it was "common knowledge". My problem now would seem to be that of proving that Joe Smith was ignorant to the concept. True, I cannot prove that he did read the book, so I would have to draw from circumstance to make the connection.
So, why would I pick on one book(so far) in particular, i.e. View of the Hebrews? Well, it is a fact that it was sold in Palmyra, and that Ethan Smith(the author) actually promoted it twice in Palmyra. In an age of no TV or radio, a visiting author to a small provincial farming community to promote his book was a great draw. This was a form of great entertainment and would cause quite a stir. Whole villages would turn up to listen to an 'outsiders' readings; it was culturally de rigeur, and dialogue would persist long after the promoter had left.

It would be difficult for anyone to argue that the View of the Hebrews book would not have been "common knowledge" in Palmyra at the time.

I'll let you chew on that for a while, Big ned, because I'm just about to unleash the "Oliver Chowdery" factor into the equation--and for those who don't know, Oliver Cowdery(co-author of the BoM) went to the very same church pastored by none other than View of the Hebrews author, Ethan Smith!! I'm looking forward to that dimension primarily because it will neatly introduce the 2nd book from which Joe Smith plagiarised.

Rebuttals, Big ned?

[I Think]

Excellent research BA.

Thank you!

[Mr Danksworth]

All of the correct answers to your questions can be found at LDS.org. Buy the ticket, take the ride.