She is gone. There were 15 prophets who followed Joseph and look where the LDS Church is today compared to the others.

P.S. Would you please enumerate what you consider to be the outstanding "fruits' of their religion as practiced over a century and a three quarters?

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 4/22/2006 8:06p).]

quote:

---

look where the LDS Church is today compared to the others.

---

Exactly! The LDS church and the 7th Day Adventists started about the same time. Today, they boast about the same member ship.

The Adventists are known around the world for their hospitals and for providing care to the needy. They never practiced polygamy. They are not known for scandal.

I have nothing critical to say about them other than that they were deceived by Ellen G. White and follow a wrong doctrine. They are almost identical to the LDS church in all these aspects!

quote:

---

There were 15 prophets who followed Joseph...

---

But there has been precious little "prophecy." Only the "uneducated" Joseph and the "uneducated" Ellen G. White were prolific writers of documents supposedly inspired by God.

El Sid,

Thanks for your deep concern.

Its a cult.....

OldArmyAggie94 -What a thorough, breathtaking analysis, what intellectual insights etc., regardless of the fact that that was the universal opinion of your religious organization centuries ago and is now held by only the extreme right wing "christians" who are being considered cults by many other denominations. Go figure.

P.S. And where do you hang your religious hat, ie. what sect?

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 4/23/2006 12:11a).]

ibmagg,

I've seen you refer to the passage in Revelation 14 a number of times to prove Moroni's existence. Even if someone had not looked up the verse in Revelation, they would know that it being the proof text for the golden plates is weak. What other cornerstone of theology hinges solely on one single verse in Scripture? And you must admit, that a need for a "restoration of the true gospel" would be a major point in God's plan. Every other major concept is reiterated throughout Scripture and can be proven by multiple texts. Any basic hermeneutic teaches that Scripture interprets Scripture. To point to one verse, in the most difficult books in the Bible and use it as your proof text, seems weak to me. Nowhere in this passage (or anywhere else in the Bible for that matter) does it speak of golden plates, a "new" or "complete" or "restoration of the" gospel, Moroni, a new prophet, etc...). The burden of proof is on the Mormons of a new gospel being foretold in Scripture, not Bible-believing orthodox Christians.

On a side note, the text in Revelation mentions 3 angels to come to the earth. You pose the question as to why one of them would be bringing the "everlasting" (notice it didn't say "new", "full", "restored", etc...) gospel if it was already on the earth. Well, the fact that this passage is in God's written Word and the Word was available at the time of Joseph Smith proves that the gospel was on the earth. It was on the earth in the form of the Bible at the very least!!! The gospel was and always has been in His Word!!! The word used for gospel is the same word used throughout the New Testament to refer to the gospel. The very word is derives its definition from the Bible!!!

I've got to run now but that is not "the only proof". I'll be back after Church; I am amazed after months of challenges, someone dared to venture out. A tip of the hat. The Restored Gospel would BE the everlasting Gospel if it was not on the earth. Simple logic!

quote:

---

these were the men who stood up close with the angel Moroni and handled the plates carefully, the sword of Laban and other items. How more real can it get?

---

Hilarious. Did they also handle the Ring of Power on their quest to Mount Doom?

The reason Mormans are funnier than talking donkeys, etc... is because it was made up by a single person. Some guy named Joseph Smith single handidly spurred an entire religion by sticking his head in a hat with a "seer stone" and some magical golden plates, then made up his own bible. How more real can it get, right?

Jeff -obviously you know very little in aanythingabout therestoration. Suggest that you spec yourself up for there was other individuals involved not to mention the other heavenly messenges who brought back the keys of authority that they had held in their respective dispensations of time. If you think it is so easy to fool millions and millions, lets see you try do it, so you can demonstrate how easy it really was for Joseph to have done so. And you will have all the advantages of education, resource materials, some money, etc. that Joseph never had.

And the religious sect that you claim membership in is??

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 4/23/2006 12:21p).]

quote:

---

The reason Mormons are funnier than talking donkeys, etc... is because it was made up by a single person. Some guy named Joseph Smith single handily spurred an entire religion by sticking his head in a hat with a "seer stone" and some magical golden plates, then made up his own bible. How more real can it get, right?

---

Don't give Joseph that much credit. He had help. A certain percentage of the Book of Mormon bears remarkable resemblance to passages found in the Book of Isaiah.

Also, the idea that American Indians were descendants of the lost tribes of Israel was not unique to Joseph Smith during his epoch.

From Brigham D. Madsen's Against the Grain (Salt Lake City, Signature, 1998):

quote:

---

He shared with me his belief that Joseph Smith had written the Book of Mormon himself using as a guide an 1823 book, View of the Hebrews, written by Reverend Ethan Smith and published in Vermont near Joseph Smith's boyhood home. [Wilford] Poulson, [a dissident BYU professor], had a well-annotated copy of View of the Hebrews with numerous similarities to the Book of Mormon carefully marked. Ethan Smith's book has a theme similar to that of the Book of Mormon: that the American Indians were of Israelite descent (perhaps from the Ten Lost Tribes in Ethan Smith's opinion), and he found supporting evidence in his examination of Indian beliefs, traditions, customs, and especially ancient American ruins (p. 219-20).

---

According to Richard N. and Joan K. Ostling, an AP religion writer and his wife, a professor, authors of Mormon America: The Power and the Promise (New York,HarperCollins, 1999):

quote:

---

The book [View of the Hebrews] was successful, as multiple early editions attest. It drew on some ideas that were commonplace at the time. Oliver Cowdery, Smith's scribe and one of the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon, lived in Poultney [Vt.] until 1825; his stepmother and three half-sisters had been members of Ethan Smith's church. It is probably safe to assume that Joseph Smith was familiar with the book. (p. 275)

---

If the words of BYU professor, an AP religion writer and a historian of American religion aren't enough, how about the testimony of B. H. Roberts, a well-known LDS Apostle and intellectual, who was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives but denied his seat because of his status as a polygamist?

According to a manuscript written by Roberts, published decades after his death in 1933 (quoted in Ostling):

quote:

---

In the light of evidence, there can be no doubt as to the possession of a vividly strong, creative imagination by Joseph Smith, the Prophet, an imagination, it could with reason be urged, which given the suggestions that are to be found in the "common knowledge" of accepted American antiquities of the times, supplemented by such a work as Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews, would make it possible for him to create a book such as the Book of Mormon is (Osling, 276).

---

The Ostlings maintain that Roberts hid his doubts about the authenticity of the Book of Mormon from his fellow general authorities. In fact, for most of his life, he was an ardent Mormon apologist.

quote:

---

Publication came decades later after his family donated Roberts' manuscripts to the University of Utah. Sterling McMurrin, a philosophy scholar at the University of Utah . . . later charged that there was an unsuccessful effort to have the University of Illinois Press suppress publication of [Roberts'] study (Ostling, 276).

---

[This message has been edited by DualAG (edited 4/23/2006 2:32p).]

If B.H. Roberts hid his "doubts" then he would not have only been "intellectually" dishonest but morally as well. He could have "exposed" the work and made much money instead of devoting his life without compensation to the Church. Joseph's wife had no doubts nor did Oliver Cowdrey nor Martin Harris and they were all involved in the translation. One of the things that convinced me that it had to be a translation was the fact that both Emma & Oliver commented on the fact that when they broke for lunch or for any other reason, and re-assembled, Joseph never has to have a single word read back to him to re-establish his train of thought. He took up right where he had left off. I sold dictaion equipment and used it in the writing of many propsals. I used secretaries taking shorthand for the same purpose. I could not begin to compose a single page without having either reviewing it myself by playing back what I had said or having the secretary read back what I had said. I submit it is almost humanly impossible to dictate a long single page without having to have some part of it played or read back. There is no question no one who has ever lived could go composing for almost 600 pages without doing so. The other striking event was when during a lunch, Joseph and Emma had an argument. When Joseph and Oliver went upstairs to recommence, Joseph could not translate a word. The spirit had with drawn itself. Only after Joseph went back downstairs and made amends with Emma, could he come back upstairs and start again.

quote:

---

If B.H. Roberts hid his "doubts" then he would not have only been "intellectually" dishonest but morally as well.

---

Why would it be intellectually and morally dishonest for even a paragon of the church to have a crisis of faith? Many religious people have developed doubts, but inertia and a feeling of responsibility to prior commitments keeps them on course. Not everyone is willing to become a martyr to his changing beliefs. Besides, there are all kinds of ways that a religious person can rationalize his doubts.

Note that Roberts didn't state definitively that the Book of Mormon was a fraud. Rather, he honestly admitted that circumstances favored a scenario in which Joseph Smith was aware of popular religious legend at the time and used two books, the Bible and View of the Hebrews to write it--not miraculously obtained golden plates and a seer stone.

If you read D. Michael Quinn's latest biography of J. Reuben Clark, Elder Statesman, you'll become aware of how much the famous First Counselor doubted the faith at certain times in his life. During Clark's time in private law practice in New York and Washington, during the Wilson administration, he darned near became an atheist. In fact, he was quite surprised to receive a call to the First Presidency that fortuitously coincided with near-certain termination of his ambassadorial duties when the Republicans fell from power in the 1932 elections.

At one time, Clark also aspired to become a bible scholar, and in fact published one not-so-well-received volume of higher criticism (Our Lord of the Gospels, 1954). However, he gave up such intellectual pursuits because he thought they endangered his faith. After all, he was in the First Presidency at the time, and we certainly can't have assistants to the prophet entertaining doubts, can we?

quote:

---

One of the things that convinced me that it had to be a translation was the fact that both Emma & Oliver commented on the fact that when they broke for lunch or for any other reason, and re-assembled, Joseph never has to have a single word read back to him to re-establish his train of thought.

---

This is just fine for somebody looking for evidence to confirm his beliefs.

As somebody who doesn't believe a single word of the Book of Mormon, I'd venture that Emma lied just like the rest of the purported "witnesses."

[This message has been edited by DualAG (edited 4/23/2006 3:56p).]

quote:

---

If you think it is so easy to fool millions and millions, lets see you try do it, so you can demonstrate how easy it really was for Joseph to have done so. And you will have all the advantages of education, resource materials, some money, etc. that Joseph never had.

---

Except that the uneducated Ellen G. white did the exact same thing! How did she do it, ibmagg? If the growth of the LDS church from Joseph to now is evidence that Joseph was a prophet, then the growth of the 7th Day Adventist movement from Ellen to now is evidence that ellen was a prophet.

How do you evaluate whether Ellen G. White was a prophet? If it is by the "fruits" that you boast are readily evident in the LDS church, then she passes the test.

DualAg iWhat would have been Emma's motivation. She lost children to the harh elements tha they were exposed to because of the mobs. Persecution was her lot the whole time Joseph was alive. What was the big pauoff? She never denied the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon till the day she died nor did any of the eleven witnesses who were excommunicated. Co-conspirators who get "cut out of the deal" have never been known to keep their mouths shut. In addition they could have reaped much money, etc. by renouncing their testimonies and exposing the "fraud". The conclusions just don't hold up.

Sid - The angel Moroni told Joseph that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to him; that God had a work for him to do; and that his name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, tongues, or that it should both good and evil spoken of among all people.

I venture to say very few people could ever begin to tell you who Ellen G. White was or is. I am aware of of no claims by her of metaphysical interaction between her and deity. I am aware of no nation or international influence or acclaim for her church. Compared to the Latter-day Saints, you hear very little about them.

Only a fool would think that the Adversary would not try to establish competing stimuli to deceive the very elect. But there is a very simple test that you can put it through to find out which is false and which is true. But it will take effort on your point. You forgot to mention the "Jehovah Witnessess" also.

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 4/23/2006 7:26p).]

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 4/23/2006 7:28p).]

quote:

---

If you read D. Michael Quinn's latest biography of J. Reuben Clark, Elder Statesman, you'll become aware of how much the famous First Counselor doubted the faith at certain times in his life. During Clark's time in private law practice in New York and Washington, during the Wilson administration, he darned near became an atheist. In fact, he was quite surprised to receive a call to the First Presidency that fortuitously coincided with near-certain termination of his ambassadorial duties when the Republicans fell from power in the 1932 elections.

---

Have you read it? or is this an abstract you took from somewhere? I admit I haven't read this book, but I am wondering if this is your summarization of the book or a review you read somewhere. I would be suprised to see anyone outside the LDS or dissaffected LDS community reading Michael Quinn.

Some have expressed amazement ad been incredulous that people would join the LDS Church. I thought this little story by Sue Ballentine in Tulsa, Okl. might help explain.

"My father and I became separated when I was a small child. It took 40 years for us to get together again. Soon after that, he became very ill and I went to Texas to be with him.

While there, I met and visited some people whose lifestyle interested me very much. In their home, I felt peace, joy and happiness. Their joy of livingand happy faces gave me cause to wonder. This was my first visit to a Mormon home.

When my father got well, he came to Oklahoma to vist me and we talked about my feeling. Itold him I wished I could feel the peace, joy and happiness I had felt in that Texas home. He showed me a scripture from Mosiah 2:41 that told me how to obtain those feelings.

Soon after he went back to Texas, I met some Mormon missionaries who were walking by my apartment. I talked with them many times after that day and I spoke to my father often by telephone.

My father baptized me in July of 2004 and in July of 2005 he took me to the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Temple, where I eceived my endowments. Now, even though my life is not easy, I have peace and happiness because I know where I came from, why I am here and where I am going.

That story is repeated thousands and thousands of times per year.

ibmagg, that is no answer. You can go visit the Seventh-Day Adventist web site if you want to know more.

Joseph and ellen did their "prophecy" about the same time, and their churches have grown to the same world-wide size.

Here are some comparisons between Joseph and Ellen:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/SDA/SDA4.html#4-c

http://www.ellenwhite.org/refute7a.htm

http://www.helpingmormons.org/Ellen.htm

Apparently, you have no answer for the challenge that the Seventh-Day Adventists present to the claims of the LDS church? The growth of the LDs church is completely unremarkable when one compares it to the growth of the Seventh-Day Adventists. The test you assert for the divine inspiration of Joseph Smith also would support the divine inspiration of Ellen G. White.

You have not told me how I can distinguish between these two churches that started small and have grown to today's numbers - and deceived millions.

[This message has been edited by El Sid (edited 4/23/2006 9:54p).]

Would you care to comment on her successors? Anymore visions?

If I was looking for Christ's Church that he established when he was on the earth, I think I would look first for a similar organization. I would then look for the same gifts of the Spirit than the ancient Church possessed. There is no church on the face of the earth that claims to have living Apostles and Prophets and all the gifts of the spirit that were present anciently. She claimed to have had a witness from the Holy Ghost that gave her a vision as to the proper Sabbath Day. Never did she claim that God or Christ spoke with her or other heavenly messengers such as Joseph and Oliver and Sidney Rigdon and ten others claimed. Look at the size of the Baptist Church and they claim no revelation or visitation at all, so the growth of her church is no more remarkable than theirs either. Remember, it is NOT safety in numbers. Only ONE of all the Churches on the earth can be right. Your challenge is to find out which one it is.

Your answer as to how to find out (and I don't believe that you will ever put forth the effort -you'd rather read anti-LDS websites) is found in Moroni 10:4-5 "And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye shall ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, IF these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a SINCERE heart, with REAL intent, having FAITH in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the POWER of the Holy Ghost. And be the POWER of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things."

You will have to read the Book of Mormon (not skim it or skip around), and ask God if it is not true as opposed as to "tell me it's not true". With Faith in Christ that God will reveal it to you. This how millions upon millions (including so many intelligent and competent people) have come to know for them selves. They were not talked into believing by the missionaries or reading or hearing a great sermon. Only the way I have just described. Sid, only if you are unafraid of truth will you be able to find it!

ibmagg,

I'd still like you to respond with other "proof" texts when you get a chance that support your claim that Revelation 14 foretells of Moroni's restoration of the gospel thru the golden plates. Could it not be that the gospel the angel was to proclaim was what he shouted in a loud voice in the next verse, which was "Fear God and give Him glory, because the hour of judgment has come"? All three angels in this chapter actually proclaim something vocally. To insinuate from this passage alone that the eternal gospel is something different than the gospel of the 19th century seems a little absurd.

Also, just because something is said by an Angel in the Book of Revelation to someone on the earth, it doesn't necessarily indicate it is a "new" message. For instance, another quote from Revelation says:

quote:

---

"Then the angel said to me, "Write: 'Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!' " And he added, "These are the true words of God."

---

I think this lesson given from the angel to John should have easily been understood by John since it is coincidentally similar to the following passage in Matthew:

quote:

---

"Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.' 10So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good and bad, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11"But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12'Friend,' he asked, 'how did you get in here without wedding clothes?' The man was speechless.
13"Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."

---

It is apparent that Jesus is teaching in Matthew that those chosen to attend His wedding banquet are blessed (hence, no weeping and gnashing of teeth).

quote:

---

OldArmyAggie94
posted 9:55p, 4/22/2006

Its a cult.....

---

quote:

---

ibmagg
posted 12:09a, 4/23/2006

OldArmyAggie94 -What a thorough, breathtaking analysis, what intellectual insights etc.,

---

Now, I seldom if ever agree with ibmagg about much of anything.

I, too, have often thought of the COJCOLDS as a cult. But I ran across this top ten list of reasons why the Mormons ARE NOT a cult and feel led by the spirit (or my acid reflux, one or the other) to share them.

This is excerpted from another website but the information contained therein is considered to be in the public domain:

quote:

---

10. We took out the throat-slitting gestures.

9. Larry King likes us.

8. At least the weird-ass underwear doesn't show, like those freaks who wear turbans.

9. Unlike JWs, we don't officially shun apostates

7. Missionaries can call home anytime they want on Christmas and Mothers Day

6. The green apron matches my eyes.

5. Cults have charismatic leaders. We haven't had one of those since 1844.

4. Ask yourself, would someone like Gordon B. Hinckley be involved in a cult?

3. We encourage questioning, as long the answers are in the manual.

2. We don't hide embarrassing history; we just choose not to talk about it.

1. Three words: pay lay ale.

---

quote:

---

If you think it is so easy to fool millions and millions, lets see you try do it, so you can demonstrate how easy it really was for Joseph to have done so. And you will have all the advantages of education, resource materials, some money, etc. that Joseph never had.

---

This is probably not the best argument for the case. The earth has an estimated population of 6.6 billion people. An estimated 2.1 call themselves Christians. I know that you believe The Bible to be true, so you would have no problem saying that the other 4.5 billion are wrong.

- Muhammad has fooled 1.3 billion of them.

- The 7th incarnation of Vishnu has fooled 900 million of them.

- Siddhartha Gautama has fooled 376 million of them.

- Confucius has fooled 350 million of them.

- Nanak Dev has fooled 23 million of them.

- Kim Il-sung had fooled 19 million of them.

- Hyppolite Leon Denizard Rivail (aka Allan Kardec) has fooled 15 million of them.

- Ellen White has fooled 15 million of them.

- Li Hongzhi has fooled 10 million of them.

- Baha'u'llah has fooled 7 million of them.

- Charles Taze Russell has fooled 6.6 million of them.

- Dr. Masaharu Tanaguchi has fooled 5 million of them.

- Rishabha has fooled 4.2 million of them.

- Hieda no Are has fooled 4 million of them.

- Ngo Van Chieu has fooled 4 million of them.

- Cho Je-u has fooled 3 million of them.

- Zoroaster has fooled 2.6 million of them.

- Nakayama Miki has fooled 2 million of them.

- Miki Tokuchika has fooled 1 million of them.

- Martin Cellarius has fooled 800,000 of them.

- Marcus Garvey had fooled 600,000 of them.

- Gerald Gardner has fooled 500,000 of them.

- L. Ron Hubbard has fooled 500,000 of them.

El Sid,

Your not fooling anyone, you knew exactly what your doing when you posted that crap. The fact that you got caught and tried to back track is laughable.

Fact is I have never heard of the guy until it was pointed out and the fact that he has published his so-called change of heart makes me question his true motive.

As has been pointed out lots of people leave this church. One of my former stake presidents (who also happened to be an aggie) left the church and has made comments along the same line. What he doesn't tell anyone is he didn't leave the church he was excommunicated for adultery.

The comical thing about this whole thread is that most every Mormon on this board has proven to be a very sober and intelligent person. And they have held their own against all the BS Anti-Mormon lit that seems to stink up the place. Yet people like El Sid come to the conclusion that none of us have inspected our religion.

Fact is I have little doubt that if El Sid lived in the time of Christ he would be persecuting Christians along with the rest of the Pharacies and Lawyers.

I personally find Protestantism to be full of two kinds of people. Honestly religious people trying to follow a good Christian morale code and a group that are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites and liars. I now know which one El Sid fall into.

You are what Eph 4:14 warns us against.

quote:

---

That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

---

[This message has been edited by Hank Hill (edited 4/24/2006 5:34a).]

You know what the big difference is between Ellen White and Joseph Smith.

Witnesses

Joseph Smith not only claimed to see God & Angels but the front of the Book of Mormon has the testimony of 3 witnesses who also claim to have seen these angels and not only that but touch the Book of Mormon Gold Plates.

In any court of law that is a pretty powerful statement to establishing the truth of a claim.

I'm sure you will claim that anyone can find 3 guys to make a claim under an oath of dishonesty.

But the fact is all 3 left the church, but not one came forward after leaving the church to change his story.

quote:

---

There is a wealth of evidence, however, which demonstrates that Oliver never denied his testimony. (For a look at what motives Oliver, or any of the other three witnesses, might have had for proclaiming their testimonies see my Witnesses.) For example, there is evidence that after leaving the Church and practicing law, Cowdery’s integrity was once challenged in court because of his Book of Mormon testimony.

...the opposing counsel thought he would say something that would overwhelm Oliver Cowdery, and in reply to him in his argument he alluded to him as the man that had testified and had written that he had beheld an angel of God, and that angel had shown unto him the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated. He supposed, of course, that it would cover him with confusion, because Oliver Cowdery then made no profession of being a “Mormon,” or a Latter-day Saint; but instead of being affected by it in this manner, he arose in the court, and in his reply stated that, whatever his faults and weaknesses might be, the testimony which he had written, and which he had given to the world, was literally true. (George Q. Cannon September 18, 1881 in JD 22:254.)

Oliver Cowdery, no longer a member of the LDS Church, testified to all those present that the Book of Mormon was true. Eventually Oliver left his law practice and journeyed to Kanesville, Iowa, with his wife and daughter and finally reunited with the Mormon Church in 1848. Before he was baptized he bore his testimony to the congregation of the church which had gathered for a conference.

“I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph, as he translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or as it is called by the book, Holy Interpreters. I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters. That book is true. ...It contains the everlasting gospel, and came forth to the children of men in fulfillment of the revelations of John, where he says he saw an angel come with the everlasting gospel to preach to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. It contains principles of salvation; and if you, my hearers, will walk by its light and obey its precepts, you will be saved with an everlasting salvation in the kingdom of God on high.” (Jenson, 1:246; italics added.)

Oliver rejoined the Church and prepared to journey to Utah to unite with the main body of the Latter-day Saints but he died while living temporarily in Richmond Missouri. Oliver Cowdery had contracted tuberculosis. His dying breaths were spent testifying of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. Lucy P. Young, his half-sister, was at his bedside and reported:

---

Now I ask what motive would he have for continuing his lie? He was living in a state that hated Mormons and thus he would not have benefited from sticking to his lie.

Unless of course he was not lying.

Each of these witnesses had left the church and each had ample opportunities to deny their testimony, but none did. Why is that?

Maybe it was because their testimony was true and to deny it would be to deny God.

BTW if this is not enough there is also the testimony of 8 witnesses that were allowed to actually touch the Gold Plates. Now we have the testimony of 12 individuals in total to back up the claim of the origin of the Book of Mormon.

Now I ask where are Ellen White’s witnesses? The scriptures say in the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses shall every word be established. Where are Ellen Whites witnesses?


[This message has been edited by Hank Hill (edited 4/24/2006 5:39a).]

You raise a good question Hank. Why would 3 witnesses leave the mormon church, but not change their story? Another question would also be why would 3 of the original mormon witness leave the church in the first place? Both are legitimate questions, neither of which prove or disprove mormonism or the plates. The fact that they supposedly saw the plates and never changed their story gives no credence to the story since they left the church. If they truly believed it to be true, then it seems they would not have left. If they simply went through a period of doubt or rebellion, then why did they never return? Maybe they didn't change their story because they were threatened. Maybe they didn't change because they believed it to be true.

On a side note, none of Christ's disciples left the church after the resurrection, even when they were threatened with death and persecution for continuing to proclaim the gospel.

On another side note, since God is not the author of confusion and He has given us His Word via the Bible, what scriptures from the Bible foretell of the need for a "restoration" or golden plates?

Hank, excuse me for mistakenly saying that none of the 3 returned as Oliver is said to have returned to the mormon church. However, this too does little to validate the plates as his integrity was being questioned in the court of law and to change his story would have branded him a liar. He may have figured that remaining consistent was better than the alternative. Or... he may have continued to believe it to be true. His return and dying final words are also being reported by a fellow mormon, which adds little validity from an outside perspective.

When I am asking for verses on the plates or the "restoration" I am also asking you to exclude Revelation 14 as neither ibmagg or anyone else is yet to explain why this verse applies after I gave my opinion as to why it doesn't (as has three and out by the way).

Here are a few Bible scriptures that refer to the restoration of the Gospel and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.

Ezek 37:16-17 refers to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. The BOM was written by members of the House of Israel who were from the house of Joseph. The word stick is actually a poor translation a more proper translation would be tablet as that was the preferred method of writing in Ezekiel’s time.

quote:

---

16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

---

Then there is Acts 3:21

quote:

---

21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

---

“Restitution of all things” refers to the Restoration of the Gospel and all things from the time of Adam to today.

Eph 1:9-10

quote:

---

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

---

If you need more scriptures that talk about the Restoration of the Gospel or the coming forth of the Book of Mormon let me know I got more. Isaiah is full of references.

I haven’t even got to the Jewish scriptures that foretell the coming of Messiah Ben Joseph who will proceed the coming of Messiah Ben David. Messiah Ben David is the Jewish Messiah that they have been waiting for for thousands of years.


[This message has been edited by Hank Hill (edited 4/24/2006 7:10a).]

If you have questions about the 3 witnesses here is a pretty good website that talks about the 3 witnesses of the Book of Mormon and presents a prettys solid argument as to why they never changed their story.

http://www.mormonfortress.com/witness1.html

Saying that the Apostles never left the church is not the same. Paul and James the brother of Jesus had major disagreements, in fact the majority of the NT is filled with letters in reference to how Gentile converts were to handle their conversion. You are correct that neither left the church but circumstances were a lot different back then as well. The NT is is vague on details if any others in the church left.

Wow, Hank. Thanks for the personal attacks! I guess that is where you go when you cannot find real arguments in support of your position.

ibmagg:

Should I also pray with an honest heart to find out if the writings of Ellen G. White are true? What if I receive a spiritual testimony that the writings of Ellen G. White are true?

quote:

---

imbagg: What would have been Emma's motivation? . . . Co-conspirators who get "cut out of the deal" have never been known to keep their mouths shut. In addition they could have reaped much money, etc. by renouncing their testimonies and exposing the "fraud". The conclusions just don't hold up.

---

Being "cut out of the deal," did not negate the tremendous personal stake she retained in upholding her previous claims. From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, which by the way, was published with the cooperation for of the church's historical department:

quote:

---

In 1860, Emma's eldest son, Joseph Smith III . . . accepted the invitation to serve as prophet and first president of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It was offered by a group of men who had formerly been members of the church . . . Emma, who had heretofore rejected connection with any of the splinter Mormon groups, was admitted into membership in 1860. In his acceptance speech, Joseph III firmly rejected polygamy as a practice of the new church, and Emma denied that her husband had participated in the practice (p. 1326).

---

Emma had a substantial interest in maintaining the validity of the Book of Mormon. It is a central scripture of the Reorganized Church (now known as the Community of Christ), of which her son became prophet. If she were to fess up to the decepton, her son's credibility as well as the credibility of her new church would have been fatally damaged.

Note that she also lied about the polygamous side of her husband's life.

quote:

---

bizag: Have you read it? or is this an abstract you took from somewhere? I admit I haven't read this book, but I am wondering if this is your summarization of the book or a review you read somewhere. I would be suprised to see anyone outside the LDS or dissaffected LDS community reading Michael Quinn.

---

Yes, I have read Elder Statesman, as I have also read Quinn's previous Clark biography, J. Reuben Clark: The Church Years and Frank Fox's biography of Clark's secular career: JRC: The Public Years.

There's a good reason for Quinn's second Clark biography. He wrote the first while still a BYU faculty member, under a commission to write one book in a five-volume series on the life of President Clark. When Mike submitted his manuscript, his supervisors on the project asked him to delete certain material. Mike agreed to omit, among other things, the account of Clark's personal struggle with his own faith and a detailed accounting of Clark's anti-Semitism. Freed of this obligation after he left BYU's employ, Quinn produced the biography he wanted to write in Elder Statesman.

You might consider that some people, neither LDS nor disaffected LDS, might have a scholarly interest in American religious history, which includes Mormonism.

[This message has been edited by DualAG (edited 4/24/2006 8:08a).]

Well sid I guess your a lot stronger at lying than reading comprehension. I think I defended my position well. Looks to me like you are too busy worrying about getting caught than the rest of my posts.

I once got a phone call from a guy trying to tell me that the US government had a new program that they would forgive all my student loans all he needed to get this done was a credit card number and my social security number. I called him a liar and a crook.

I guess I should have been more trusting and given him my information.

Play innocent all you want sid you know what you were trying to do and so do the rest of us. The only personal attack is against one who was caught trying to pull a fast one.

Like I said you would have made a great Lawyer in Christ's time, probably be a good one today as well.

[This message has been edited by Hank Hill (edited 4/24/2006 7:07a).]

quote:

---

Ezek 37:16-17 refers to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. The BOM was written by members of the House of Israel who were from the house of Joseph. The word stick is actually a poor translation a more proper translation would be tablet as that was the preferred method of writing in Ezekiel’s time.

---

Or... This is referring to spiritual Israel being united under Christ. Also, according to your explanation, the BOM was written by those from the house of Joseph, but their being from the house of Joseph is a claim made by the mormons. There is nothing outside (i.e., the Bible) mormonism to substantiate that claim.

quote:

---

Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

---

Or... this is referring to the return of Christ and not golden plates. Do you mean to tell me that in the context of this chapter that the prophet predicted by Moses referred to in vs. 21 was Joseph Smith and not Christ himself? Peter had been explaining Christ all throughout the chapter and then all of a sudden we are supposed to assume he switches to Joseph Smith without indicating a change. Seems like a poor hermeneutic.

quote:

---

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

---

Or... the mystery being referred to by Paul is exactly what he explains in chapter 3 vs. 2-6 which is that

quote:

---

the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. 4In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets. 6This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.

---

I think we need to look at these verses in context and not try to read something from them that is not there. It almost seems to me that you are putting any verse that sounds like it could fit to prove your point hoping that noone reads them in context. I don't think it is fair for you to not carefully consider which verses you use as support. Putting just one verse that obviously doesn't fit or is obviously taken out of context leads one to believe that the intent is to provide as many scriptures as possible to make it seem like there is more evidence. When, in reality, if there were only a few scriptures that, taken in context, gave validity to your claim, it would have a much greater impact.

OK, so more personal attacks and now an accusation of "lying" .

Please feel free to point out a single lie in my posts. (You won't find one.)

I also notice that you were quick to jump in with the implication that Bob McCue probably was an adulterer or some such.

Hank, you sound like you are full of anger.

Sid -I am going to pile on with some more with examples of your lying or, at a miminimum, your mis-representations. You have been bleating about Ellen G. White and trying to compare her role with that of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The history of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church stems back to the decade of the 1840's, the era when a Wiliam Miller proclaimed the immenent return of Christ to the earth. Although the Millerites disbanded following the failure of Christ to reappear in 1844, many millennial conscious Protestants reorganized and eventually three segments of former Millerites fused, producing the Seventh-day Adventists denomination.

ONE of these three groups were led by White and her husband James. She had originally joined the Methodists on probation and was ex-communicated in 1842 after listening to William Miller and thinking that he was right about the emminent return of Christ -and going public with her new views. While reviewing her convictions and struggling to find an answer for the failure of Miller's calculations, she and four other Adventist women joined with each other in prayer. This is when she claimed to have had a vision. During one of her early preaching engagements, she met James White, another former Millerite and minister of the Christian Religion. In 1846, after learning the views of Joseph Bates regarding the Sabbath, she adopted Saturday as the proper day of rest, and later claimed that she had received a vision on the subject that confirmed it was correct. She claimed over the course of the years, hundreds and hundreds of visions. Since many former Millerites held that Ellen Harmon White possessed the gift of prophecy and viewed her writings as inspired, she BECAME the spiritual spokesman for the Adventists. Not all Millerites supported the claims of White, Bates and Edson. In the 1860s three other Millerite groups formed national organizations, the Advent Christian Association, the Life and Advent Union, and the Church of God (Adventist), the latter society formed by persons who denied the inspiration of Mrs. White.

UNLIKE Joseph, Mrs. White did NOT lay claim to the title of prophet or prophetess, stating that she was instructed that she was the Lord's "MESSENGER". She believed that her work was that of a prophet and the Adventists of today have come around to that view. The Adventists today are emphatic that, although they accept her writings as inspired counsel, they have never equated them with scriptures as some have falsely charged.

To compare her with Joseph is laughable. She inherited a ready made group of dis-illusioned followers of William Miller (of which she was one) and with her claims of visions (never seen by anyone else) and "inspired" writings that are obviously not "inspired" enough to be accepted as scripture, she in effect "grew the business". If any anybody practices the temporal health code of the Latter-day Saints, they too will reap the same benefits.

After the martyrdom of Joseph, there were actually THREE of the most controversial religious societies of this country formed -The Seventh-day Adventist; the Church of Christ, Scientist; and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Societ. The celebrated founders of these denominations were reared in the largest churches of mid-nineteenth century America; but after rebelling against several popular PROTESTANT tenets, they inaugerated a quest for religious truth. Their search for truth led to the conclusion that conscientious reformers of the past had FAILED to reestablish the religion introduced by Jesus Christ. They followed a pattern set by many other protestors of Christendom as they reevaluated the major themes of the bible and unfolded a peculiar version of the Gospel message. Two of the three founders were women.

Satan's main work has always been, when truth was on the earth, to provide a "counterfeit" alternative that would decieve the people. All one has to do to confirm how successful he has been is to look at the over 500 "Christian " denominations. Nice try Sid, but as usual "no cigars".