Contradiction in the Book of Mormon?

[_gdemetz]

Themis, you know what? There is a reason that this anti sites accept the fact and the testimonies and evidence that the witnesses signed the papers! Do you know what that is? The don't want to lose credibility and look stupid, like some here by trying to change history!!!

[_Themis]

Themis, you know what? There is a reason that this anti sites accept the fact and the testimonies and evidence that the witnesses signed the papers! Do you know what that is? The don't want to lose credibility and look stupid, like some here by trying to change history!!!

You are the only one looking dumb making assertions over and over again without backing them up. I have said more them once that if there was a signed document it is missing. We don't have any signed document and even the apologists know it.

[_Drifting]

You are an idiot for asking me to produce such a document when even the anti Mormons admit there was one! Besides, why would you need to see that anyway, troll, when all have plainly testified of it and you know it! Also, these were all men of good report and whose testimony would have been accepted in any court of law prior to that time!

Why has their testimony been changed?

Bump because gdemetz seems to be avoiding this inconvenient factoid...

[_gdemetz]

Themis, historical witnesses, including enemies of the church, admit that it was signed, and that is good enough for me. I will ask you like I asked Drifting, is there anything that you do believe in other than yourself?

[_Themis]

Themis, historical witnesses, including enemies of the church, admit that it was signed, and that is good enough for me.

What historical witnesses? You always assert but never back up. The one reference you quoted(but not where you got it) I asked you to provide when it was written, but whom, and where did they get their information. The witnesses statements were I believe prepared by Joseph and the names were attached. This alone could easily create the idea that they were signed, and Joseph may have certainly wanted that idea to flourish. Then you get people just asserting it. In the end we still don't have good evidence there ever was a signed document, but you want people to believe it because you want to believe it.

I will ask you like I asked Drifting, is there anything that you do believe in other than yourself?

If this were a question it would have been a dumb one, but in reality it is just an attack on those who make you look bad suggesting we are only into ourselves. Change your attitude and try again.

[_BobAliceEve]

I am interested in discussing the original subject from a different point of view if I might.

Given one man and one woman (the apparent makeup of the children of Lehi's adult organization) and a possible child per family count of around 10 with 8 living to marrying age (all these are my own guesses and I welcome yours) that means that every 45 years or so the Lehi-ite population would multiply by 4. 45/4, 90/16, 135/64, etc.

A starting population of 20 in 600 BC would produce a population of 1200 in 465 BC but clearly there were hundreds of thousands if not millions in the immediate area of the Lehi-ite family. Your thoughts please.

[edited to revise year 135 multiplier to 64 from 32 resulting in 1200, not 600].

[_gdemetz]

Hello Themis? It was a question, and I already gave you a reference for that!

[_Themis]

Hello Themis? It was a question, and I already gave you a reference for that!

You gave nothing as usual, and you know full well you were not asking a question but trying to make an attack on other people. Very christian of you.

[_gdemetz]

It's there Themis and you can read it if you like!

[_Themis]

It's there Themis and you can read it if you like!

We both know it's not there. You can keep saying this lie and it won't change anything. You don't even define how you view someone who only believes in themselves. I am not sure my view would have many who could qualify.