NOM

And if all of this isn't enough, Oliver Cowdery never mentioned this event in his own journal. the last entry for 1836 is March 27 concerning the Kirtland Temple dedication. He talks about seeing a glorious cloud and cloven tongues, and of hearing a rushing wind, but nothing about a visit by Jesus,...

To follow-up on D&C 2, this has a slightly better write-up of the timeline: https://rationalfaiths.com/doctrine-and-covenants-sections-2-3-10-4-5-a-historical-overview/ Section 2 was first published in the Times and Seasons (April 15, 1842) and was first included in the Doctrine and Covenants in the...

The introduction to Section 2 dates it to September 21, 1823. Is there evidence that it actually came from a later date? I do, however, remember reading comments by Joseph Smith after 1836 in which he spoke about the coming of Elijah as a future event, but I didn't save those references (d'oh!) It ...

It is clearly not a dictation by either Joseph or Oliver. If I were an apologist I think I would run with this angle; just say that Warren screwed it up. Of course, that comes with a lot of it's own baggage, like why Joseph Smith didn't dictate it directly in first person, and how is it that we hav...

Someone posted this link recently about the Elias/Elijah problem with Joseph Smith's vision... and I guess in some ways it's the same type of apologetics you see on FAIR, etc. http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/08/elias-as-forerunner-in-lds-scripture.html There's a little more on the page ...

This reminds me of Happy Gilmore when he goes to his 'happy place' and has the vision of all the things that make him happy. I never liked the old testament angry God - I always believed only in the NT happy God and that's what I pictured when I prayed. And I think if I was praying to a God that was...

Here's what pisses me off about the WoW... It was never a commandment! And so the church decides to make this an obedience test because they were forced to drop polygamy, and in the process have banned things that have since been proven healthy while neglecting the key thing that would've saved live...

this argument presupposes an agrement on determining right and wrong. Religion is the ultimate appeal to authority. And the crux is we disagree about the authority. In the end, they subscribe to divine command theory. And if they argue that they don't, then god is no authority for determining right...

I'm so sorry -- please vent away here as you need to because it does help sometimes to type it out to avoid saying it out loud later. I think about this all the time -- my kid is right now not going to church as I try to work things out with DW, but I know that it's not going away and I have no idea...

What the church has gotten (uniquely) right: Being kinder on immigration (Jim Bennett brings this up and I'll give it to him even if I feel the reasons are not as wholesome) But what secular organizations have been getting right all along, without the need for a prophet to tell people it's ok to no...

So this is an argument that Jim Bennett made frequently during his conversation with Bill Reel and it's an argument I've heard by many other apologists and I believe DW has gone to this argument a few times - that there are mistakes made but they are minor compared to what they get right. Which make...

One of the problems with LDS history and doctrine is words change meanings. I've been researching the period when Martin Harris lost the 116 pages. We also hear that Joseph lost (or the angel took them)the urim and thummim, except we still don't know if that means the breastplate and/or glasses, th...

I just finished "part 7" today... by far my favorite. Again, I will say upfront that Jim has been very kind during these discussions and as I've said in this thread I think he comes off way better than his CES Reply does (they discuss that at the beginning of this one), but you can see the wheels co...

Just This Guy wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:08 am

Can you listen to part 7 without listening to 1-6? I could do one episode, all 7 is a bit much ore me to get through.

Yeah - you'll lose some of the context of what they're talking about, but (so far) I think you could just listen to part 7 and not feel completely lost with it.

I'm in part 7... the "looking back" segment... I wish the first six were like this. Jim is pissed from the pushback from Bill, and it's amazing. I'm only 45 minutes in, but man it's great listening to him try to back out of some of these arguments when it gets testy.

Glad you were able to give the inventory on your terms and that it went well -- sounds like a good experience overall and hopefully one that will help others who read it!

Red Ryder wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:25 pm

Did I mention I hate garments?

Garments are the worst thing ever. They should make the teenagers wear garments so they are immediately less attracted to each other, and then once you get married you can stop wearing the Joseph Smith version of a chastity belt.

The problem is that if the church apologized and admitted that their history is a lie, what is the point? It's like when Lance Armstrong finally admitted he doped all those years... he would have never admitted it if the evidence didn't force him to, so why should I respect him more for it? Maybe if...

So I worked on a write-up of this over a few days when I was waiting at the warehouse for stuff... it needs some polishing and some images to break up the text. If anyone is bored and wants to read it, let me know what you might add, take out, change, whatever. I feel like 2/3 is setting up for the ...

The second section regarding the Lord being pleased to have men "use their free agency in regard to these matters" destroys Joseph's argument that an angel of God threatened him with a drain sword if he didn't practice polygamy. These guys can't have it both ways. They want to have their cake and e...