Other Religious Forgeries

[dastardly stem]

If the plates were real, and there are plenty of witness statements to verify that they were, then I don’t know that it is unreasonable to consider the fact that THIS WAS the best means for God to accomplish His purposes for increasing faith upon the earth. A faith that we develop through our own study, prayer, and works.

Some of the ideas that have been presented here for alternative ways for God to ‘get the word out’ are extremely silver plattery. I’m of the opinion that this isn’t and hasn’t been the way God works in the world.

One thing I think we can agree on, it is absolutely critical that the critics do whatever they can to discredit the plates.

Regards,
MG

Let's consider the plight of the Book of Abraham as another example. If God was intent on preserving record on plates, because they are durable, then what happened with the Book of Abraham? Additionally once we consider the content of the papyrus from which the Book of Abraham was purportedly extracted from, we learn there was no Book of Abraham at all. It is most likely, it seems, Smith, if he's forwarding God's word, used the old relic of papyrus to divine thoughts given of God, transported to the poor man's brain. As it turns out, as well, the papyrus date to a couple of millennia after Abraham, making no mention of Abraham. Why should the plates be any different? Maybe they too do not mention anything about Nephi?

If as you say the plates were the best way for God to communicate the Book of Mormon, then why did God fail to follow the best way for the Book of Abraham? And to give back credence to a popular criticism of the whole Joseph translated the plates into English, why is it reported that the plates lay hidden away as he dictated the words that became the Book of Mormon? There doesn't seem to be much reason to think the story of the Book of Mormon is found on the plates anyway. That is plates could have been found and they may have stories etched on them that have no relation to the time and place of what the Book of Mormon claims, but like the ancient papyrus God simply needed them to magically enter the thoughts to Smith to write up the scripture.

And, as I recall from a previous conversation, you seemed intent to define faith as superstition and gullibility, and I had asked what is the great nobility of such a faith? It hardly seems like a virtue, but more of a vice. As I recall I got no response from you, but I remain curious.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

tHe PlAtEs wErE tHe BeSt wAy

> didn't use the plates

damned brilliant testimony you thick-skulled Mormonkey.

- Doc

[Dr Exiled]

MG:

You have to look at this from God's perspective. Why go through all the steps when direct communication is the best way to communicate? In order to write this entry, I didn't first put it on plates, hide them away for a time, get some farm boy to dig them up so he could not use them to translate my communication here. I simply wrote down the words directly. It is so obvious that I wonder what you are trying to do here by trying to insist that communication through plates is somehow better than direct communication? What's the point? I don't think you thought this one through.

[IHAQ]

If the plates were real, and there are plenty of witness statements to verify that they were, then I don’t know that it is unreasonable to consider the fact that THIS WAS the best means for God to accomplish His purposes for increasing faith upon the earth. A faith that we develop through our own study, prayer, and works.

Some of the ideas that have been presented here for alternative ways for God to ‘get the word out’ are extremely silver plattery. I’m of the opinion that this isn’t and hasn’t been the way God works in the world.

One thing I think we can agree on, it is absolutely critical that the critics do whatever they can to discredit the plates.

Regards,
MG

Let's consider the plight of the Book of Abraham as another example. If God was intent on preserving record on plates, because they are durable, then what happened with the Book of Abraham? Additionally once we consider the content of the papyrus from which the Book of Abraham was purportedly extracted from, we learn there was no Book of Abraham at all. It is most likely, it seems, Smith, if he's forwarding God's word, used the old relic of papyrus to divine thoughts given of God, transported to the poor man's brain. As it turns out, as well, the papyrus date to a couple of millennia after Abraham, making no mention of Abraham. Why should the plates be any different? Maybe they too do not mention anything about Nephi?

If as you say the plates were the best way for God to communicate the Book of Mormon, then why did God fail to follow the best way for the Book of Abraham? And to give back credence to a popular criticism of the whole Joseph translated the plates into English, why is it reported that the plates lay hidden away as he dictated the words that became the Book of Mormon? There doesn't seem to be much reason to think the story of the Book of Mormon is found on the plates anyway. That is plates could have been found and they may have stories etched on them that have no relation to the time and place of what the Book of Mormon claims, but like the ancient papyrus God simply needed them to magically enter the thoughts to Smith to write up the scripture.

And, as I recall from a previous conversation, you seemed intent to define faith as superstition and gullibility, and I had asked what is the great nobility of such a faith? It hardly seems like a virtue, but more of a vice. As I recall I got no response from you, but I remain curious.

The other point here is that the Gold Plates weren't used to communicate the Book of Mormon. A rock found when digging was used.

[Kishkumen]

You have to look at this from God's perspective. Why go through all the steps when direct communication is the best way to communicate? In order to write this entry, I didn't first put it on plates, hide them away for a time, get some farm boy to dig them up so he could not use them to translate my communication here. I simply wrote down the words directly. It is so obvious that I wonder what you are trying to do here by trying to insist that communication through plates is somehow better than direct communication? What's the point? I don't think you thought this one through.

On the other hand, if God does not exist, then why look at it from God's perspective at all, since there is no God? Or, we might imagine what kind of hypothetical God works in these ways, in order to examine or understand our interlocutors' God-concepts.

In my view, the plates are absolutely necessary to the whole story. Take away the plates, and what do you have? Information beamed into some person's brain from some source or other out there? The plates are anchored in the culture of the book in Western civilization. For thousands of years people have imagined the lost sacred lore of a book that could be someday unearthed and settle important questions or help us achieve amazing feats. Now we are to take the plates out of the equation? At the very least the plates make the whole thing interesting. If there is something that ties the story of the Book of Mormon, as an object, to the past in a plausible way, it is the alleged existence of the plates. As a story, they are compelling stuff. As an artifact, they can only survive as lost plates. Once they are found in a mundane context, they become unremarkable again.

[mentalgymnast]

Positivism vs. negativism isn’t inherently a bad thing. What to do with all of these positive witness statements?

Hey, let’s go to the negative witnesses and focus solely on that!

Regards,
MG

Swing and a miss.

Now it’s your turn. Help me see the error of my ways.

Regards,
MG

[Dr Exiled]

You have to look at this from God's perspective. Why go through all the steps when direct communication is the best way to communicate? In order to write this entry, I didn't first put it on plates, hide them away for a time, get some farm boy to dig them up so he could not use them to translate my communication here. I simply wrote down the words directly. It is so obvious that I wonder what you are trying to do here by trying to insist that communication through plates is somehow better than direct communication? What's the point? I don't think you thought this one through.

On the other hand, if God does not exist, then why look at it from God's perspective at all, since there is no God? Or, we might imagine what kind of hypothetical God works in these ways, in order to examine or understand our interlocutors' God-concepts.

In my view, the plates are absolutely necessary to the whole story. Take away the plates, and what do you have? Information beamed into some person's brain from some source or other out there? The plates are anchored in the culture of the book in Western civilization. For thousands of years people have imagined the lost sacred lore of a book that could be someday unearthed and settle important questions or help us achieve amazing feats. Now we are to take the plates out of the equation? At the very least the plates make the whole thing interesting. If there is something that ties the story of the Book of Mormon, as an object, to the past in a plausible way, it is the alleged existence of the plates. As a story, they are compelling stuff. As an artifact, they can only survive as lost plates. Once they are found in a mundane context, they become unremarkable again.

I was responding to believing MG's point that communicating through plates was somehow the best way for the Mormon God to communicate His holy decrees. I think direct communication would obviously be better with less chance of miscommunication. However, it would make the story "behind the music" a little less exciting for sure. And that is probably why the mysterious plates that no one could see, except the chosen faithful, was put into the story. It generated a little buzz probably.

Maybe the Mormon God wanted to generate a little p.r. excitement for his strange work? Why merely communicate directly when some mystery can be added to the mix, generating some anticipation for the release of the chloroform in print? We need more magic and mystery and ghost committees ....

Too bad the product was as mundane as it turned out to be. God should have developed his characters a little more, giving them a little more depth. Maybe a little more work on some of the stories to make them a little more exciting? Perhaps have the stripping warriors save some fair virgins from the evil lamanites? Anyway, the Mormon God needed some more help and this is why I don't think Shakespeare took part in the ghost committee.

[mentalgymnast]

If the plates were real, and there are plenty of witness statements to verify that they were, then I don’t know that it is unreasonable to consider the fact that THIS WAS the best means for God to accomplish His purposes for increasing faith upon the earth. A faith that we develop through our own study, prayer, and works.

Some of the ideas that have been presented here for alternative ways for God to ‘get the word out’ are extremely silver plattery. I’m of the opinion that this isn’t and hasn’t been the way God works in the world.

One thing I think we can agree on, it is absolutely critical that the critics do whatever they can to discredit the plates.

Regards,
MG

Let's consider the plight of the Book of Abraham as another example. If God was intent on preserving record on plates, because they are durable, then what happened with the Book of Abraham? Additionally once we consider the content of the papyrus from which the Book of Abraham was purportedly extracted from, we learn there was no Book of Abraham at all. It is most likely, it seems, Smith, if he's forwarding God's word, used the old relic of papyrus to divine thoughts given of God, transported to the poor man's brain. As it turns out, as well, the papyrus date to a couple of millennia after Abraham, making no mention of Abraham. Why should the plates be any different? Maybe they too do not mention anything about Nephi?

If as you say the plates were the best way for God to communicate the Book of Mormon, then why did God fail to follow the best way for the Book of Abraham? And to give back credence to a popular criticism of the whole Joseph translated the plates into English, why is it reported that the plates lay hidden away as he dictated the words that became the Book of Mormon? There doesn't seem to be much reason to think the story of the Book of Mormon is found on the plates anyway. That is plates could have been found and they may have stories etched on them that have no relation to the time and place of what the Book of Mormon claims, but like the ancient papyrus God simply needed them to magically enter the thoughts to Smith to write up the scripture.

And, as I recall from a previous conversation, you seemed intent to define faith as superstition and gullibility, and I had asked what is the great nobility of such a faith? It hardly seems like a virtue, but more of a vice. As I recall I got no response from you, but I remain curious.

Would plates have been a possibility for Book of Abraham? Would papyri have been a possibility for the Book of Mormon?

As it is, from reading I did years ago, I understand that plates were/are not an unreasonable expectation for record keeping during the time frame and localities that the Book of Mormon history purportedly took place in. The fact that Joseph ‘picked’ plates as the medium for translation is not a smoking gun for ‘fraud’. Plates actually are an evidence of possibility that Joseph Smith was telling the truth. Yes, I know and am aware of similar elements between his story and others that run parallel to his in some respects, but nonetheless, stone box, gold plates...fit the bill for antiquity that comfortably resides in what would exist within the real world during the time/locations of Book of Mormon chronology.

At least that’s what I came away with back in the day when I was looking at this in a lot more detail.

Regards,
MG

[mentalgymnast]

Too bad the product was as mundane as it turned out to be.

A whole lot of folks would disagree with you on that point.

Regards,
MG

[Res Ipsa]

Now it’s your turn. Help me see the error of my ways.

Regards,
MG

Oooo. Frozen by a slider right at the knees.

Please review the terms of engagement set by you in our last conversation. Turns are not a thing.