robuchan Posted August 30, 2012 Posted August 30, 2012 I have no idea what you're getting at. You make no sense at all. You say you want to look at evidence. You take assertions by dead guys recorded by other dead guys from documents that have questionable provenance and call them facts.I'm getting to the point I don't think you can be helped.You are determined to accept whatever nonsense has been asserted for propositions simply because it supports your presuppositions.Yet you worry about my credentials.Sheesh.All I have done in this thread is ask people if it's accepted by LDS scholars that Joseph did the following:1. looked into this peepstone in his hat and saw treasure (or told people he saw treasure)2. said the treasure slipped lower as they dug or were about to digYou won't answer me. I'm not dissing your credentials. I don't care about those at all. I mention your status as a lawyer because I think it's stopping you from understanding what I'm doing. You assume I'm trying to prove or disprove something.Others seem to suggest yes LDS scholars accept this.Others seem to deny it, saying no LDS scholars do not accept this.I have some logic based on this that I've shared. But for the most part I'm simply trying to identify what LDS scholars believe about Joseph's treasure digging attempts.
DavidB Posted August 30, 2012 Posted August 30, 2012 Even without critics, the leaning seems toward a trial. Oliver Cowdery used the term "acquited" which is not a term for a preliminary hearing, he also used "no cause of action" which could be a term for a preliminary hearing.Gordon Madsen uses the term trial and he use the term acquitted.And FAIR uses the term trial.But none of matters, it could have been before the Supreme Court of The United States and the legal term for the proceeding and the proceeding itself still would not matter.
USU78 Posted August 30, 2012 Author Posted August 30, 2012 All I have done in this thread is ask people if it's accepted by LDS scholars that Joseph did the following:1. looked into this peepstone in his hat and saw treasure (or told people he saw treasure)2. said the treasure slipped lower as they dug or were about to digYou won't answer me. I'm not dissing your credentials. I don't care about those at all. I mention your status as a lawyer because I think it's stopping you from understanding what I'm doing. You assume I'm trying to prove or disprove something.Others seem to suggest yes LDS scholars accept this.Others seem to deny it, saying no LDS scholars do not accept this.I have some logic based on this that I've shared. But for the most part I'm simply trying to identify what LDS scholars believe about Joseph's treasure digging attempts.You've been answered and answered again. Everybody else seems to understand that accepting that somebody probably said something is not the same thing as that thing being true. LDS Scholars don't tend to believe Thompson's account for the reasons stated. EVERY antiLDS Scholar takes the Thompson statement as TRVTH. And so, apparently, do you.You lack logic. You apparently lack ingenuousness. And you're borderline hijacking the thread.Why not get back to the question: Examination or Trial?
Recommended Posts