The Problem With The First Vision Accounts

[mfbukowski]

Though I must confess more than a little ontological 

affection for the Wittgensteinian Pot-Stirrer.

 

Here's a book from him to read, review, and share comments

with us, via Amazon Books:

 

 

 

UD

Them words is to big

 

but theys rite

Edited March 8, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Pahoran]

Well, that just proves to any latter day saint, that their foundation, does not exist

That's false.

I realise that as a fanatical anti-Mormon polemicist, that's what you want to prove.

But you have failed.

Entirely.

 

...And frankly, I am not here to win an argument. I am just defending the faith once deliver to the saints

You misspelled "attacking."

 

and the mormon people are entitled to believe anything, but frankly, they have another "jesus" another "spirit" and certainly another "gospel"

Three shameless lies in one sentence.

It didn't take long for your true colours to come oozing through, did it?

Would it surprise you, TM, to know that I spotted you, approximately from your second post, as a conservative North American Protestant, of the "Evangelical" or "Born again" variety?

And would you like to know how I deduced that?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Tacenda]

ah, but you missed the whole point...I am not trying to prove the "vision' was true or not! I am merely ask/ want a third party that corroborates J Smith telling this alledge vision...matter of fact I added .."forget that the vision was true or not, Where is the documentation, that J Smith told??? You said no one is siding with me? but you are again wrong...Uncle Dale is on my side, Mr Dale have asked many questions about the claims of mormonism, and he has not receive any answers either...as I see it J Smith did not have to tell us anything , history, is in our side, like the Astronauts that went to the moon? they did not have to tell us anything either about them going to the moon...tons of evidence is what determines whether they visited the moon or not

Just imagine, the God of the Universe with his Son appeared to a boy of 14, 15, 16, years old, but there is nothing in History that corroborates this god and his son came here...J Smith claims it happened...but no one knows ...someone is not telling the truth...again you can believe anything, that is your choise, but if you believe the dog has five legs, because you count, the tail as another leg?// well, just saying it and believing it, and even faith on it, does not make it true OK? The dog has four legs period, and the earth is not flat, and Santa lives and is real, millions believe in Santa (Children that is )

TM

Do you know if other prophet's visions have been corroborated like you think JS' s should be, in the 19the century that is. Curious, and kind of lazy to look myself.

[mfbukowski]

Though I must confess more than a little ontological 

affection for the Wittgensteinian Pot-Stirrer.

 

Here's a book from him to read, review, and share comments

with us, via Amazon Books:

 

 

 

UD

 

Here, Wittgenstein is asking us how we come to mean different aspects of the piece of paper each time we point at it. Our behaviour is the same every time we point, so our meaning the colour or the shape cannot be in the act of pointing. Furthermore, if we attempt to point to these different aspects of the paper mentally, we have the same problem. We cannot point to the colour or shape of a piece of paper without using language. Pointing to certain aspects of a piece of paper requires some expression of what we are meaning each time we point, and this can only be achieved through the use of language. Meaning involves nothing more than using words. The same point seems to apply with all intention and representation. If I tell someone that I am thinking of Napoleon and they ask me "who do I mean?", I will respond by defining Napoleon further. I may say that I meant the person who won the battle of Austerlitz. This is done with language. My meaning `Napoleon' consists not in an internal act or representation, but rather a collection of dispositions and background ideas that I have gained solely through the use of language. Whether I am in a state with a particular intentional content is not determined by anything that happens to me while I am in that state. What is important is what else is true of me while I am in that state, and the situation or context that I happen to be in. How I come to understand a thought is not a matter of consciousness or introspection, but a matter of how I make use of the thought.⁸

The point is this: No internal act, or event can suffice as an act of meaning. Even mental representation does not help. There will always be a problem of connecting the mental image with reality.

 

http://www.def-logic.com/articles/silby013.html

 

The only reality we can "know" is linguistic, and therefore "information"

 

The idea's been around for a hundred and fifty years

[cinepro]

Do you know if other prophet's visions have been corroborated like you think JS' s should be, in the 19the century that is. Curious, and kind of lazy to look myself.

 

Richard Bushman has stories of several other people in the general area and time frame who claimed to have visions of Jesus or visitations from angels.  So there is evidence that others claimed to have these visions and shared the stories with others at that time.

[Defender]

I haven't read all the responses, but I've heard about this issue and I don't see what the big deal is. I have a testimony that the first vision is true. Joseph Smith kneeled in the sacred grove and prayed to know which church was true. God and Jesus appeared to him and God pointed to Jesus and said, "This is my beloved Son." This was the greatest event since Jesus was resurrected. Because of the importance of this event, it is understandable that Satan would want to cause people to doubt it. Satan can be very convincing and that's why we must be strong and have faith in the Church. If the Church published an official version, that's the version that is true. Don't you think the Prophets and apostles would have prayed about it before making it official? 

[TMESSENGER]

 

Well, that just proves to any latter day saint, that their foundation, does not exist...And frankly, I am not here to win an argument. I am just defending

 the faith once deliver to the saints ( Jud 1:3 Jude 3-4

"....I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. )

NIV

 

 and the mormon people are entitled to believe anything, but frankly, they have another "jesus" another "spirit" and certainly another "gospel" (2 Cor 11:4 "...

4 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.

NIV

 

mfbukowski   

.If this site was of evangelicals, and we were discussing the crucifiction, and resurrection of my precious Lord Jesus, and if someone wanted to inquire about documentation from the Bible,or secular sources,  you would have many of us trying to give you that information without the name calling or the many spins on the subject...And there are hundreds of books on this subject, because the Apostle Paul. wrote about this particular foundation of Christianity

 

1 Cor 15:12-24

 

12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.   20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 

NIV

 

TM

But you miss the point that you take the bible on faith and have no more reason to believe the bible than we have to believe the Book of Mormon or Joseph's story.

You are totally missing it.

You have no "foundation" either. Throw the quotes- they are irrelevant if they are all lies. That works on both sides of this argument

 

 

I do believe the Bible, and my faith (my trust, faith is trust) is based on objective facts it can be demonstrated that the Bible is divine supernatural from the God of the Universe, ...it is beyond the scope of my answer here,  but briefly, I have used the acronym M*A*P*S

M--Stands for manuscripts thousands of them..some of them but just a few years from the described event

A--Stands for Archeology, thousands of artifacts that prove the historicity of the Bible event

P--Stands for probability (The quality or fact of being probable)

S--Stands for statistics, (interpretetion of numerical data and manipulated by mathematical probability

 

All these facts attest a scientific method that it is impossible that any prophecy, was man made because not only one prophecy was fulfilled 100% but many were fulfilled by the Christ of the Bible  many of these prophecies are in the range of 10 raised to a factor of fifty and it is regarde as inposible...therefore it requires that God or a supernatural action outside of time and space dimensions is the author of the Bible

 

  In a nut shell the OT, predicted by prophecies at about 60 that Christ is coming, the NT teaches us that Christ is here.

The last prophet was John,  Jesus himself said so Matt 11:13-14

13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 1

NIV

Luke 16:16

 

16 "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.

NIV

And finally, the Inspired book of Hebrews tell us that we don't need any more prophets, we have the Word , the Son Himself speaking

 

Heb 1:1-3

1:1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 

NIV

So you see Mr  mfbukowski,   My faith , my trust is very reliable in the Bible J Smith comes on the seen, and tries to tell us that the God of the Bible is a mere man, that became a god see King Follet Discourse...(Documentary History of the Church V ol 6 p-302-17) I dared you to find this teaching (that the mormon god was a man, gets married and becomes a god) in any of your LDS scriptures)....and let us go on record that you yourself have NOT given me a third party document that corroborates J Smith told this story. 

 

So I do have a foundation, based on facts...

 

[Uncle Dale]

I haven't read all the responses, but I've heard about this issue and I don't see what the big deal is. I have a testimony that the first vision is true. Joseph Smith kneeled in the sacred grove and prayed to know which church was true. God and Jesus appeared to him and God pointed to Jesus and said, "This is my beloved Son." This was the greatest event since Jesus was resurrected. Because of the importance of this event, it is understandable that Satan would want to cause people to doubt it. Satan can be very convincing and that's why we must be strong and have faith in the Church. If the Church published an official version, that's the version that is true. Don't you think the Prophets and apostles would have prayed about it before making it official?

I suppose it makes a difference to whom such a question

is posed. To the BIC member who has grown up in the

tradition of his fathers, it may bring one response.

From the curious investigator, only beginning to learn

some things about Mormonism, it may bring no

response at all.

And to the questioning or disgruntled member, who has

no testimony (or at least has no acceptable testimony)

it may even bring a hostile reaction.

Being all things to all people is a difficult proposition,

but Paul was at least attempting to do something

positive when he gave that apostolic counsel. We

might try to do just a little of that -- and ask for the

wisdom to see ourselves as others see us.

UD

[TMESSENGER]

That's false.

I realise that as a fanatical anti-Mormon polemicist, that's what you want to prove.

But you have failed.

Entirely.

 

You misspelled "attacking."

 

Three shameless lies in one sentence.

It didn't take long for your true colours to come oozing through, did it?

Would it surprise you, TM, to know that I spotted you, approximately from your second post, as a conservative North American Protestant, of the "Evangelical" or "Born again" variety?

And would you like to know how I deduced that?

Regards,

Pahoran

Guilty as charged...that I am an evangelical and I echo the real Apostle Paul who said...Rom 1:16-20

 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

 

17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

 

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

 

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

 

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

KJV

What is the proper spelling of attacking?  remember English is not my native language

[mfbukowski]

I do believe the Bible, and my faith (my trust, faith is trust) is based on objective facts it can be demonstrated that the Bible is divine supernatural from the God of the Universe, ...it is beyond the scope of my answer here,  but briefly, I have used the acronym M*A*P*S

M--Stands for manuscripts thousands of them..some of them but just a few years from the described event

A--Stands for Archeology, thousands of artifacts that prove the historicity of the Bible event

P--Stands for probability (The quality or fact of being probable)

S--Stands for statistics, (interpretetion of numerical data and manipulated by mathematical probability

 

All these facts attest a scientific method that it is impossible that any prophecy, was man made because not only one prophecy was fulfilled 100% but many were fulfilled by the Christ of the Bible  many of these prophecies are in the range of 10 raised to a factor of fifty and it is regarde as inposible...therefore it requires that God or a supernatural action outside of time and space dimensions is the author of the Bible

 

  In a nut shell the OT, predicted by prophecies at about 60 that Christ is coming, the NT teaches us that Christ is here.

The last prophet was John,  Jesus himself said so Matt 11:13-14

13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 1

NIV

Luke 16:16

 

16 "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.

NIV

And finally, the Inspired book of Hebrews tell us that we don't need any more prophets, we have the Word , the Son Himself speaking

 

Heb 1:1-3

1:1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 

NIV

So you see Mr  mfbukowski,   My faith , my trust is very reliable in the Bible J Smith comes on the seen, and tries to tell us that the God of the Bible is a mere man, that became a god see King Follet Discourse...(Documentary History of the Church V ol 6 p-302-17) I dared you to find this teaching (that the mormon god was a man, gets married and becomes a god) in any of your LDS scriptures)....and let us go on record that you yourself have NOT given me a third party document that corroborates J Smith told this story. 

 

So I do have a foundation, based on facts...

Objective facts?

Objective facts?

Ah yes, that is why every scientist is Christian, and all agree with Creationism, and that the earth is 6000 years old, and every college professor is an Evangelical.

Every philosopher also, all lawyers, and every rational human being. There are no atheists, because God is an objective fact.

No faith required.

You have proven your case and I will be baptised Baptist tomorrow. No further discussion is necessary. I don't want to take that away from you.

[Uncle Dale]

What is the proper spelling of attacking?  remember English is not my native language

.

For $35 I bought an old version of Microsoft Word on

e-bay, installed it on my computer, and have depended

upon its spell-checker and grammar-watcher to help

me write intelligible prose.

Then I got this I-pad I'm using at the moment, and lost

most of that good help. But, if you've got $35 to spare,

you might try it.

As for the fellow you're sparring with -- he's a rather

capable debater -- not like us whimpy Yanks who

cave in all too quickly.

Take care, or he may win the argument(s).

UD

[mfbukowski]

.

For $35 I bought an old version of Microsoft Word on

e-bay, installed it on my computer, and have depended

upon its spell-checker and grammar-watcher to help

me write intelligible prose.

Then I got this I-pad I'm using at the moment, and lost

most of that good help. But, if you've got $35 to spare,

you might try it.

As for the fellow you're sparring with -- he's a rather

capable debater -- not like us whimpy Yanks who

cave in all too quickly.

Take care, or he may win the argument(s).

UD

Nope he whipped me good.

I had no idea that the bible is an objective fact. How can you argue with that?

[Uncle Dale]

Nope he whipped me good.

I had no idea that the bible is an objective fact. How can you argue with that?

I meant Pahoran -- but I can go back and change

the posting, to make it sound like it was you I so

admired. Six of one -- half a dozen of the other.

UD

(nobody has called me an bitter anti-Mormon today. I must be

losing my old "burr under the saddle blanket" touch here)

[TMESSENGER]

Do you know if other prophet's visions have been corroborated like you think JS' s should be, in the 19the century that is. Curious, and kind of lazy to look myself.

I don't understand your question, but if you are talking about J Smith prophecies, . J Smith has more that 65 to his credit, but none of them came true.

Jean Dixon( predicted Kennedy, would be elected and died in office) would be better than J Smith...in prophecies, but to speak for God, if a true prophecy, you need to be 100% acurate

 

If you read Deut 13Deut 13:1-5

13:1 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you. 

NIV

Noticed the place where, the prophet is predicting some thing and it comes to pass...but it is trick  so you believe he has powers and enticed you to follow other gods...that is the big problem...even If J Smith predicted many prophecies and they came true?.. but to convinced you to follow other god?  then that is what, in my humble opinion, this is what J Smith did...J Smith is bringing another god (was once a man, and becomes a god, see King Follet Discourse DHC Vol 6 p- 302-17) another "jesus "( Gospel Principles p-9 a first son of celestial parents??) Jesus of the Bible was a miracle conception born of a virgin )

 

Matt 1:23

3 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"-which means, "God with us." 

NIV

The mormon holy ghost is another "son" of these celestial parents ( see eom.byu.edu/index..php/Holy_Ghost) is a spirit man, a spirit son of God the Father

 

 

-

 

-

[Uncle Dale]

Do you know if other prophet's visions have been corroborated like you think JS' s should be, in the 19the century that is. Curious, and kind of lazy to look myself.

We generally fall into the mental mind-rut of equating

a biblical tradition prophet with a fortune teller. While

there are many instances of just that sort of predictive

prophecy told in the Bible, the roles and the activities

of a "prophet" were not quite that simplistic.

There is a considerable amount of prophetic writing,

and even oracles, which are something more than

just telling the future.

All through history there have been fortune tellers.

Just by the law of averages, we should be able to come

up with some coincidental examples, that look like

pretty accurate future-telling.

But I was never one to ouuu and awe over Edgar

Cayce, or the predictor of the HMS Titanic disaster.

That fortunate writer even got the name of the ship

right (or fairly close to right).

Rather than looking for some examples of successful

future-telling, I'd look for examples of people who lived

their lives and spoke their convictions in ways which

the following years confirmed were wise and proper.

The true prophet changes your mind about things. And

the truly successful prophet changes your heart.

UD

[TMESSENGER]

Objective facts?

Objective facts?

Ah yes, that is why every scientist is Christian, and all agree with Creationism, and that the earth is 6000 years old, and every college professor is an Evangelical.

Every philosopher also, all lawyers, and every rational human being. There are no atheists, because God is an objective fact.

No faith required.

You have proven your case and I will be baptised Baptist tomorrow. No further discussion is necessary. I don't want to take that away from you.

Jesus of the Bible called the pharisees , He called them sons of the devil(John 8:42-44

 

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

 

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

 

44 Ye are of your father the devil , and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

KJV

 

The devil is then trying to win the souls of men.  Just because you are intelligent and a scientist, if the devil has put on color glasses, you are doom, Everything you will see,  will observe the same as the color glasses sees.

...yes the god of this world is Luci...2 Cor 4:4-6

4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. 6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. 

NIV

[TMESSENGER]

I haven't read all the responses, but I've heard about this issue and I don't see what the big deal is. I have a testimony that the first vision is true. Joseph Smith kneeled in the sacred grove and prayed to know which church was true. God and Jesus appeared to him and God pointed to Jesus and said, "This is my beloved Son." This was the greatest event since Jesus was resurrected. Because of the importance of this event, it is understandable that Satan would want to cause people to doubt it. Satan can be very convincing and that's why we must be strong and have faith in the Church. If the Church published an official version, that's the version that is true. Don't you think the Prophets and apostles would have prayed about it before making it official? 

Nothing in mormon history, that has any documentation, that J Smith experience these two personages appearance in 1820, nothing other than J Smith saying it...and yet nothing in history from 1820  to 1838, that demonstrate anyone corroborates J,Smith alledge visit of these two personages...

[Uncle Dale]

Nothing in mormon history, that has any documentation, that J Smith experience these two personages appearance in 1820, nothing other than J Smith saying it...and yet nothing in history from 1820  to 1838, that demonstrate anyone corroborates J,Smith alledge visit of these two personages...

 

Perhaps not.

 

But there was at least one fellow who claimed to have

actually been present and able to observe Smith's

reported Christophany in Ohio, a few years later.

 

 

.

And before that, there was another guy, also in Ohio,

who claimed to have actually been present and able

to observe an equally marvelous Smith epiphany.

 

 

.

Of course Stanford Professor Craig Criddle identifies these two

vision witnesses as having secretly assisted Joseph Smith in the

composition of the Book of Mormon -- so, some skeptics may be

a little slow to admit their testimony of having seen what Smith

claimed to see, in situations somewhat similar to the purported

1820 "first visiom"

 

UD

[Nemesis]

Nothing in mormon history, that has any documentation, that J Smith experience these two personages appearance in 1820, nothing other than J Smith saying it...and yet nothing in history from 1820  to 1838, that demonstrate anyone corroborates J,Smith alledge visit of these two personages...

 

You are preaching not discussing.  We all one and not the other.  This will be your only warning.  Read the board guidelines http://www.mormondialogue.org/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

 

Nemesis

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

What is the proper spelling of attacking?  remember English is not my native language

 

Rofl. I think the point is really missed on you. I will let you figure it out.

[TMESSENGER]

You are preaching not discussing.  We all one and not the other.  This will be your only warning.  Read the board guidelines http://www.mormondialogue.org/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

 

Nemesis

Will this warning, will it applied to others? 

[TMESSENGER]

.

For $35 I bought an old version of Microsoft Word on

e-bay, installed it on my computer, and have depended

upon its spell-checker and grammar-watcher to help

me write intelligible prose.

Then I got this I-pad I'm using at the moment, and lost

most of that good help. But, if you've got $35 to spare,

you might try it.

As for the fellow you're sparring with -- he's a rather

capable debater -- not like us whimpy Yanks who

cave in all too quickly.

Take care, or he may win the argument(s).

UD

Thank you, but no one has given me a true answer, only name calling and criticising me and ridicule  personally , what kind of discussion is that? so my respond is in question? I am actually defending myself 

By the way , do you have your periodicals of your site?  all in one CD? or apparatus that could be bought, ? and how can I contact you ? dcmess@aol.com

And I say it again, I am not here to win any arguments, but to ask for the truth.

[TMESSENGER]

Perhaps not.

 

But there was at least one fellow who claimed to have

actually been present and able to observe Smith's

reported Christophany in Ohio, a few years later.

 

 

.

And before that, there was another guy, also in Ohio,

who claimed to have actually been present and able

to observe an equally marvelous Smith epiphany.

 

 

.

Of course Stanford Professor Craig Criddle identifies these two

vision witnesses as having secretly assisted Joseph Smith in the

composition of the Book of Mormon -- so, some skeptics may be

a little slow to admit their testimony of having seen what Smith

claimed to see, in situations somewhat similar to the purported

1820 "first visiom"

 

UD

Yes, but as you implied here, it is all hear say...

There is a church around here that even has a cross in front of their building, but they are from the community of Christ, I visited them and was given a blue BOM...

Then one day while talking to two mormon missionaries, and we were discussing certain passages in the BOM I pulled  my blue BOM and they did not have the same numerology? the chapters were not arrange as the LDS BOM....this was to my advantage, because it proved the notion, that there are other "denominations"  that are call or derived from the LDS sect

[Kevin Christensen]

Perhaps not.

 

But there was at least one fellow who claimed to have

actually been present and able to observe Smith's

reported Christophany in Ohio, a few years later.

.

And before that, there was another guy, also in Ohio,

who claimed to have actually been present and able

to observe an equally marvelous Smith epiphany.

 

Of course Stanford Professor Craig Criddle identifies these two

vision witnesses as having secretly assisted Joseph Smith in the

composition of the Book of Mormon -- so, some skeptics may be

a little slow to admit their testimony of having seen what Smith

claimed to see, in situations somewhat similar to the purported

1820 "first visiom"

 

UD

Of Criddle, for those who don't remember:

However, there were very significant problems

with this study. We will discuss the following

problems:

• Failing to include Joseph Smith as a candidate author

• Misapplying a closed-set technique for an open-set problem

• Confusing “closest” to mean “close”

• Misinterpreting relative probabilities as absolute probabilities

• Ignoring a high rate of false classifications

• Using circular statistical thinking

• Disregarding statistical problems of homo geneity and multiplicity

• Confounding the primary candidate author’s differing writing styles

See the essay here:

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/23/1/S00007-51769fad6dedc7Fields.pdf

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited March 9, 2015 by Kevin Christensen

[UtahTexan]

Yes, but as you implied here, it is all hear say...

There is a church around here that even has a cross in front of their building, but they are from the community of Christ, I visited them and was given a blue BOM...

Then one day while talking to two mormon missionaries, and we were discussing certain passages in the BOM I pulled  my blue BOM and they did not have the same numerology? the chapters were not arrange as the LDS BOM....this was to my advantage, because it proved the notion, that there are other "denominations"  that are call or derived from the LDS sect

 

First, you never provided the documentation I requested.  So, I am forced to accept that you have no supporting documentation and now realize your point was baseless.

 

Second, be careful using the argument regarding failed prophesies.  It could truly destroy your ability to accept the Bible.

 

Third, be just as careful complaining that anything to do with LDS History is Hearsay.  90%of the Bible is Hearsay.  Shall we ignore the Bible now?