NOM

http://www.ldsliving.com/When-Joseph-Sm ... ph/s/86058

When I read articles like these I wonder sometimes if the writer truly believes it or if they are an undercover NOM, digging up gems like this to make people stop and think.

No, I'm pretty sure they think this is faith promoting. It probably gives them chills and testifies to them what an amazing prophet Joseph was. To me it is just further evidence of what an amazing B.S.er he was and how gullible his followers were - and still are today. I mean really, how ridiculous does something have to be before you realize the guy was constantly pulling stuff out of his butt?

I just read this article.

Total apologetic drivel. The goal appears to intentionally slide things around, get precise about words and intentions with an objective, and protect/re-direct questions to maintain viability of the original narrative.

Smoke and mirrors. And irritating.

The church, with the lack of archaeological evidence, has to back-track and re-direct the statements early GA's made about the last battle being in North America, and the astonishingly lack of "swords".

It's a balancing act that the LDS church is trying to maintain. We have Russel M. Nelson saying this about the Book of Mormon:

Russell M. Nelson wrote:“It is not a textbook of history, although some history is found within its pages. It is not a definitive work on ancient American agriculture or politics. It is not a record of all former inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere, but only of particular groups of people.”

The apologetic doctrinal position is that the Book of Mormon was absolutely real, but don't bother trying to find any tangible evidence since it was just a small group of people that were probably just lost to history. The institutional church wants all the benefit of historicity providing a cultural obligation to obey LDS doctrine, but they don't want have the epistemological weight of providing any proof of that historicity.

This is largely the same position held by Evangelical Christians and their desire for Biblical literalism. They know that the rhetorical weight of the Bible is higher simply by it being treated as a historical document handed down from ancient people with wisdom from God Himself. We could get practical wisdom from "The Lord of the Rings", but we all know it is a priori not "real" even if its stories of temptation, courage, and faith can still move us to action. Neither the LDS church nor the Evangelical church want to compete strictly on content and rhetoric with their scripture. They want the benefit of faith that a divine god provides an obligation to obey the religious gatekeepers who own their sacred text.

There were no steel swords or chariot wheels found in Zelph's mound. Hmmmmmm.........

So my question is who crossed out Cumorah and Nephites, and when?

I'm getting pretty tired of this argument: "Joseph Smith himself left behind no direct statements about...fill in the blank."

About what else did Joseph Smith not leave direct statements? The claim that he saw Jesus, Moses, Elijah (and Elias) in the Kirtland temple leaps to mind.

ETA: did you notice the ad at the bottom for the Chiasmus Jubilee, starring a 20-years-younger Jeffrey Holland? Sounds like a barrel of monkeys, and there's still time to get your tickets! Interesting that the subtitle is Looking Forward to the Next 50 Years. 50 more years of searching for chiasmus in the BoM to look forward to, folks. It's going to get even truer!

deacon blues wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:59 pm There were no steel swords or chariot wheels found in Zelph's mound. Hmmmmmm.........

I assume you mean obsidian and moccasins?