On a different thread I posed the question below to why me, about what is their position about the credibility of the scribes that Joseph Smith used to produce a record.
why me wrote: Here is the point: I have always knew that the accounts of Joseph Smith saying this or that come from second hand sources. I have no idea how to verify their accuracy. I just must look at them as such and go with it. And so should you. Now did Joseph Smith check these notes and make corrections? Maybe not. I don't know.
Why me, are you saying that: a. We should just accept ALL of what the scribes wrote at face value or b. We should just accept NONE of what the scribes wrote at face value or c. We should just accept SOME of what the scribes wrote at face value based on our own opinion
What is your position on this and why?
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
When Joseph said or did something that isn't embarrassing now, in the 21st century, the scribes were right. Otherwise they were wrong. Isn't it obvious?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Yes, very credible and accurate. Just read what l-dsince says when quoting their writings to support what currently passes for doctrint.
But flawed, wrong and totally unreliable and possibly even deluded acoholics usurping josephs authority whenever 'doctrine' is being changed or challenged and what they wrote is not longer popular.
Really simple, isn't it?
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."