Yay!! Check fraud!

[_Mercury]

by the way, this thread was supposed to be about check fraud, not the church.

Shady acres is a place to discuss Mormonism, not Check Fraud.

[_Polygamy Porter]

Too bad your checks did not have a mesh design and the following on them:
..............
..V....L...
..............
....__.....
.............

Then I bet no fraud would have fallen up those protected checks, being from the only true check book... just a thought...

[_Dr. Shades]

As for the Kinderhook plates, I have but one question: if they were translated as such, why didn't they get put into scripture?

Because he only did a quick overview, not word-for-word and verse-for-verse. Sort of like how the Book of Mormon didn't see print until every character was translated (as opposed to just printing a pamphlet saying, "Israelites were the first migrants to this continent. They eventually were visited by Christ, but then fell into unbelief and destroyed each other").

Most everything else Joseph Smith translated was put into the scriptures, but the Kinderhook plates never were.

See above.

This leads to speculation, of course, but its a definite question that needs to be answered. Could it be that the quote from Joseph Smith there was one of those "speaking as a man" vs "speaking as a prophet" ideas?

No, because Joseph Smith didn't know the language the Kinderhook Plates were written in. The only way he could've gotten the gist of them was via prophetic powers.

I have to go to bed here in a few, and so I will read over the rest of these later, but on first look, Dr. Shades. your site is NOT an anti site. It is information, most of which bear no weight upon my testimony. My definition of an anti site is a site which is dedicated in trashing and pulling away members of the Church who are lukewarm in their testimony to begin with. Your site is just information, not one way or the other. Maybe I will find different tomorrow, as for now, its just an information site.

I'll take that as a compliment.

by the way, this thread was supposed to be about check fraud, not the church.

In that case, you should've started it in the Off-Topic Forum, not here. That's what the Off-Topic Forum is there for.

[_Ray A]

Shades has a very interesting journey through Mormonism. First it was the Holy Spirit which influenced him, now it's "Holy Logic" which influences him.

[_Dr. Shades]

Hey Ray, have you been reading my missionary journal weblog?

[_Ray A]

Hey Ray, have you been reading my missionary journal weblog?

I'll go through it. As you know, I burnt mine.

I have no doubt you went from a sincere believer, to a sincere disbeliever. I just think you are wrong in some of your assumptions about "Mormonism". What are you really trying to prove, Shades? That your "experience" of Mormonism is more valid than those who still believe? You're trying to win us to "logic", aren't you? Well, there's more to life than "logic". "TBMs" continue in belief for reasons you have LONG forgotten.

[_Dr. Shades]

I'll go through it. As you know, I burnt mine.

You shouldn't have.

I have no doubt you went from a sincere believer, to a sincere disbeliever. I just think you are wrong in some of your assumptions about "Mormonism".

As do all Mormons. No big surprise there; it comes with the territory.

What are you really trying to prove, Shades?

That there's a whole 'nother side to Mormonism than what the institution itself preaches. A dark side, if you will.

That your "experience" of Mormonism is more valid than those who still believe?

No. An experience is an experience. I'm just offering another perspective on it all.

You're trying to win us to "logic", aren't you?

Not necessarily, since I'm not trying to "win" anyone. I'm simply sharing the other side of the coin. What people choose to do with it is entirely up to them. My only "message" is, "don't say I never told you so."

Well, there's more to life than "logic". "TBMs" continue in belief for reasons you have LONG forgotten.

Oh, believe me, I haven't forgotten them at all. I simply have a more mature, well-rounded perspective on them is all.

[_KimberlyAnn]

by the way, this thread was supposed to be about check fraud, not the church.

Nephi, you posted an off-topic post in the wrong forum. I made it on-topic for you. You should be thanking me! ;)

Oh, and if you think there's not pro-Mormon literature containing outright lies or, at the least, lies of omission, you're nuts! But it's alright for them to lie, I guess. Joseph Smith, after all, long ago started the LDS tradition of lying for the Lord.

KA

[_Nephi]

by the way, this thread was supposed to be about check fraud, not the church.

Nephi, you posted an off-topic post in the wrong forum. I made it on-topic for you. You should be thanking me! ;)

Oh, and if you think there's not pro-Mormon literature containing outright lies or, at the least, lies of omission, you're nuts! But it's alright for them to lie, I guess. Joseph Smith, after all, long ago started the LDS tradition of lying for the Lord.

KA

You don't even believe in God, so what do you care if someone lies about something you don't believe in?

[_Mercury]

by the way, this thread was supposed to be about check fraud, not the church.

Nephi, you posted an off-topic post in the wrong forum. I made it on-topic for you. You should be thanking me! ;)

Oh, and if you think there's not pro-Mormon literature containing outright lies or, at the least, lies of omission, you're nuts! But it's alright for them to lie, I guess. Joseph Smith, after all, long ago started the LDS tradition of lying for the Lord.

KA

You don't even believe in God, so what do you care if someone lies about something you don't believe in?

Gawd, your credibility just left the building.