Book of Mormon a Stolen Novel?

[_LittleNipper]

There seems to me to be a fine line between divine inspiration and Satanic tampering. I feel if a work pulls one's full attention away from the Bible or throws question to it, then that work is not of God.

[_Themis]

What lies exactly? It seems to me you are backing off the view that the mythical Spaulding manuscript existed. Let me know if you consider that a lie too.

The tooth fairy is one. You keep accusing my of believing in a spalding manuscript. I have never said I did, only that we have evidence that he wrote 2 stories. I am not sold on that or that if it existed that it had the Book of Mormon story in it. There is also evidence to support this also. It is not good enough to be conclusive so I don't make any conclusions. I have been clear on this and even tried to correct you and still get your inane false accusations I never made. Check out the link on the first page and learn something about the issue first.

Earth to Themis. I've seen and experienced God, so I know the scriptures are true. God really exists. You should give it a try sometime.

I know you claim to, and although no one here believes you(I think for good reasons) that is not the issue. The issue is seeking God and him showing up. It never happened for you or others here, even though many of us have spent decades seeking God and following him as best we know how.

No, I'm being very consistent. You just fail over and over to grasp what I'm saying because you want to be disagreeable. The only difference between our views is that I believe Abraham existed, wrote an account, and that Joseph Smith revealed that account.

I grasp what you are saying very well. I also grasp you like two separate theories about it and bounce back and forth between the two. You also don't want to address some of the problems with them. You don't want to go any farther then Joseph got it wrong. It's off topic anyways.

Again, the assumption that Joseph Smith claimed to know Egyptain Hieroglyphics is just false.

Umm earth to tobin, the claim Joseph made is that he could translate Egyptian, and he was working on a Grammar and Alphabet to be able to translate without divine assistance. The evidence is still overwhelming that Joseph was making it up. You don't really address the problems here, but again off topic.

Again, I feel this is a completely accurate view of how you approach Mormonism. You delight in any belief, no matter how ridiculous, that reinforces your paradigm that Mormonism is false.

And yet you have to wonder why I am willing to criticize things that would attack LDS claims and you will always support what defends your beliefs and attack what you think does not. Remember I am not the one who is lying in this thread about what other peoples positions are.

[_Tobin]

What lies exactly? It seems to me you are backing off the view that the mythical Spaulding manuscript existed. Let me know if you consider that a lie too.

The tooth fairy is one. You keep accusing my of believing in a spalding manuscript. I have never said I did, only that we have evidence that he wrote 2 stories. I am not sold on that or that if it existed that it had the Book of Mormon story in it. There is also evidence to support this also. It is not good enough to be conclusive so I don't make any conclusions. I have been clear on this and even tried to correct you and still get your inane false accusations I never made. Check out the link on the first page and learn something about the issue first.

Clearly, your reading comprehension needs work. The tooth fairy is an analogy. Every reasonable person knows the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Just like every reasonable person knows there aren't magic books like the mythical Spaulding manuscript. That still doesn't prevent you from offering it as a "possible" theory about how the Book of Mormon came to be despite that fact. So, in short, there is no lie here - no matter what you think otherwise.

Earth to Themis. I've seen and experienced God, so I know the scriptures are true. God really exists. You should give it a try sometime.

I know you claim to, and although no one here believes you(I think for good reasons) that is not the issue. The issue is seeking God and him showing up. It never happened for you or others here, even though many of us have spent decades seeking God and following him as best we know how.

And I'll keep saying there is a God and you really can speak with him over and over because it is true (it doesn't matter if you believe me or not). And I'll answer your question about why God didn't speak with you. Look at what you are doing right now and what you have become. God knows who and what you are and you have demonstrated EXACTLY the depths that you are wiling to go in rebellion against God. I certainly wouldn't trust you and I can understand why God wouldn't either. Now, if God chooses to intervene in your life, so be it. Hopefully he will, but that is between you and God.

No, I'm being very consistent. You just fail over and over to grasp what I'm saying because you want to be disagreeable. The only difference between our views is that I believe Abraham existed, wrote an account, and that Joseph Smith revealed that account.

I grasp what you are saying very well. I also grasp you like two separate theories about it and bounce back and forth between the two. You also don't want to address some of the problems with them. You don't want to go any farther then Joseph got it wrong. It's off topic anyways.

No, you don't grasp it at all. There are not two separate theories, there is one simple explanation. The fact you keep stating that there are two theories demonstrates that despite the number of times I have explained it.

Again, the assumption that Joseph Smith claimed to know Egyptain Hieroglyphics is just false.

Umm earth to tobin, the claim Joseph made is that he could translate Egyptian, and he was working on a Grammar and Alphabet to be able to translate without divine assistance. The evidence is still overwhelming that Joseph was making it up. You don't really address the problems here, but again off topic.

Please try to engage your brain before you reply. Joseph Smith didn't know reformed Egyptian and translated the Book of Mormon (following so far?) by the gift and power of God. Joseph Smith revealed the Book of Abraham by the gift and power of God too (still with me). He didn't know Egyptian Hieroglyphics (something you already know). Now, was that so hard to grasp?

Again, I feel this is a completely accurate view of how you approach Mormonism. You delight in any belief, no matter how ridiculous, that reinforces your paradigm that Mormonism is false.

And yet you have to wonder why I am willing to criticize things that would attack LDS claims and you will always support what defends your beliefs and attack what you think does not. Remember I am not the one who is lying in this thread about what other peoples positions are.

I'm not lying. I've got you pegged to a tee and know exactly what you are all about and you don't like it is all.

[_LittleNipper]

God speaks to man presently, through His Word --- the Bible.

[_Tobin]

God speaks to man presently, through His Word --- the Bible.

The Bible is a book. It is a thing and apparently an idol for you. God is real and speaks to man face-to-face. Read your Bible someday and you'll see that repeated over and over. God's words have no end and he looks down on those that worship idols. You should really try to seek God and speak with him instead of worshipping your man-made idol.

[_Themis]

Clearly, your reading comprehension needs work. The tooth fairy is an analogy. Every reasonable person knows the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Just like every reasonable person knows there aren't magic books like the mythical Spaulding manuscript. That still doesn't prevent you from offering it as a "possible" theory about how the Book of Mormon came to be despite that fact. So, in short, there is no lie here - no matter what you think otherwise.

You have misrepresented what I said about the spalding manuscript even after I tried to correct you, so I think you were being dishonest. I find it really funny that you would say any reasonable person knows there aren't magic books like the mythical spalding manuscript, and yet you have no problem with magical gold plates. The inconsistencies with you abound. It also demonstrates on another issue how ignorant you are about the subject and what evidence exists for and against the theory.

And I'll keep saying there is a God and you really can speak with him over and over because it is true (it doesn't matter if you believe me or not). And I'll answer your question about why God didn't speak with you. Look at what you are doing right now and what you have become. God knows who and what you are and you have demonstrated EXACTLY the depths that you are wiling to go in rebellion against God. I certainly wouldn't trust you and I can understand why God wouldn't either. Now, if God chooses to intervene in your life, so be it. Hopefully he will, but that is between you and God.

You really know how to put your foot into your mouth a lot. You act like you know me, or know what kind of a believing member I was. Now you suggest that God wouldn't show up because I am an unbeliever, but I am still a member and not an atheist. I guess I have to go farther if I want God to show up. You are just upset I keep bringing up the fact your advice of seeking God has no merit since it never worked for you. by the way I am not willing to rebel against any God, unless that God is an ass not worth following.

No, you don't grasp it at all. There are not two separate theories, there is one simple explanation. The fact you keep stating that there are two theories demonstrates that despite the number of times I have explained it.

I find it funny you are pimping two theories and you don't even know it. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Please try to engage your brain before you reply. Joseph Smith didn't know reformed Egyptian and translated the Book of Mormon (following so far?) by the gift and power of God. Joseph Smith revealed the Book of Abraham by the gift and power of God too (still with me). He didn't know Egyptian Hieroglyphics (something you already know). Now, was that so hard to grasp?

I have already stated that Joseph claimed to translate with the power of God. This doesn't address the problems I have brought up, but since you have never shown interest in dealing with it I won't expect anything.

I'm not lying. I've got you pegged to a tee and know exactly what you are all about and you don't like it is all.

You have done some lying, and you certainly don't have anyone pegged here. You are one of those posters who jump to conclusions about people simply by whether they believe LDS claims or not. I am willing to bet I have critiqued anti claims about the church more then you have apologetics that support what you want to believe. I also know some of my questions I keep bringing up have pissed you off.

[_Tobin]

Clearly, your reading comprehension needs work. The tooth fairy is an analogy. Every reasonable person knows the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Just like every reasonable person knows there aren't magic books like the mythical Spaulding manuscript. That still doesn't prevent you from offering it as a "possible" theory about how the Book of Mormon came to be despite that fact. So, in short, there is no lie here - no matter what you think otherwise.

You have misrepresented what I said about the spalding manuscript even after I tried to correct you, so I think you were being dishonest. I find it really funny that you would say any reasonable person knows there aren't magic books like the mythical spalding manuscript, and yet you have no problem with magical gold plates. The inconsistencies with you abound. It also demonstrates on another issue how ignorant you are about the subject and what evidence exists for and against the theory.

I'm not misrepresenting you at all. You were the one that offered that the mythical spaulding manuscript could be legitimate. Again, that is the same as offering the theory that the tooth fairy wrote it as a legitimate idea as well. Now, as far as the source of the Book of Mormon - that is at least verifiable. You can speak with God about it.

And I'll keep saying there is a God and you really can speak with him over and over because it is true (it doesn't matter if you believe me or not). And I'll answer your question about why God didn't speak with you. Look at what you are doing right now and what you have become. God knows who and what you are and you have demonstrated EXACTLY the depths that you are wiling to go in rebellion against God. I certainly wouldn't trust you and I can understand why God wouldn't either. Now, if God chooses to intervene in your life, so be it. Hopefully he will, but that is between you and God.

You really know how to put your foot into your mouth a lot. You act like you know me, or know what kind of a believing member I was. Now you suggest that God wouldn't show up because I am an unbeliever, but I am still a member and not an atheist. I guess I have to go farther if I want God to show up. You are just upset I keep bringing up the fact your advice of seeking God has no merit since it never worked for you. by the way I am not willing to rebel against any God, unless that God is an ass not worth following.

Oh, I do know you and exactly how you think. And the only solution for you is to humble yourself, seek God, speak with him and repent.

No, you don't grasp it at all. There are not two separate theories, there is one simple explanation. The fact you keep stating that there are two theories demonstrates that despite the number of times I have explained it.

I find it funny you are pimping two theories and you don't even know it. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Again, one simple explanation.

Please try to engage your brain before you reply. Joseph Smith didn't know reformed Egyptian and translated the Book of Mormon (following so far?) by the gift and power of God. Joseph Smith revealed the Book of Abraham by the gift and power of God too (still with me). He didn't know Egyptian Hieroglyphics (something you already know). Now, was that so hard to grasp?

I have already stated that Joseph claimed to translate with the power of God. This doesn't address the problems I have brought up, but since you have never shown interest in dealing with it I won't expect anything.

There are no problems. You point out Joseph Smith was a human being and had misconceptions and made mistakes. That is just human nature. Get over it.

I'm not lying. I've got you pegged to a tee and know exactly what you are all about and you don't like it is all.

You have done some lying, and you certainly don't have anyone pegged here. You are one of those posters who jump to conclusions about people simply by whether they believe LDS claims or not. I am willing to bet I have critiqued anti claims about the church more then you have apologetics that support what you want to believe. I also know some of my questions I keep bringing up have pissed you off.

Your questions don't piss me off. The only problem I have with you is that you can't seem to grasp my points and come up with an intelligent response. You'll note I'm responding to you point for point here because I feel it is important to drive that home in this thread. That you just are incapable of responding in a reasonable way to anything I'm saying.

[_Themis]

I'm not misrepresenting you at all. You were the one that offered that the mythical spaulding manuscript could be legitimate.

You accused me of believing it existed and was the source of the Book of Mormon. I never stated either. I only said there is evidence to support both ideas. Evidence is not proof.

Again, that is the same as offering the theory that the tooth fairy wrote it as a legitimate idea as well.

All this says is you don't know much about the issue. To compare it to the tooth fairy is obviously silly and lessens credibility, although I am not sure you have any here at the moment. If you are interested in looking at the evidence let me know.

Oh, I do know you and exactly how you think. And the only solution for you is to humble yourself, seek God, speak with him and repent.

But that never worked for you, and again you don't know me to know how humble I may be. You are just jumping to conclusions you want.

Again, one simple explanation

One is called duel meaning while the other is the catalyst theory. Very different.

There are no problems. You point out Joseph Smith was a human being and had misconceptions and made mistakes. That is just human nature. Get over it.

I have no problem with Joseph being flawed, but that doesn't mean we should just stop there and not look at whether it really explains the catalyst theory. I think it fails miserably, but you have always ignored this issue.

Your questions don't piss me off. The only problem I have with you is that you can't seem to grasp my points and come up with an intelligent response. You'll note I'm responding to you point for point here because I feel it is important to drive that home in this thread. That you just are incapable of responding in a reasonable way to anything I'm saying.

I understand well what you are saying. I also understand you are ignorant of a number of LDS issues including the OP. Perhaps you could show why it is supposed to be similar to the tooth fairy, and I will ask you to provide evidence for this assertion.

[_Tobin]

I'm not misrepresenting you at all. You were the one that offered that the mythical spaulding manuscript could be legitimate.

You accused me of believing it existed and was the source of the Book of Mormon. I never stated either. I only said there is evidence to support both ideas. Evidence is not proof.

If you don't believe the mythical Spaulding manuscript existed, then why offer it? Were you lying to LittleNipper?

Again, that is the same as offering the theory that the tooth fairy wrote it as a legitimate idea as well.

All this says is you don't know much about the issue. To compare it to the tooth fairy is obviously silly and lessens credibility, although I am not sure you have any here at the moment. If you are interested in looking at the evidence let me know.

The reason I don't know much about the mythical Spaulding manuscript is because it never existed. Nobody has ever seen it, examined it or even seen a shred of evidence it existed (not even a draft of it). For all intentional purposes, it is the tooth fairy.

Oh, I do know you and exactly how you think. And the only solution for you is to humble yourself, seek God, speak with him and repent.

But that never worked for you, and again you don't know me to know how humble I may be. You are just jumping to conclusions you want.

You still don't get it. I've seen God and spoke with him, so apparently the scriptures are true that you can speak with him. You seem to miss that point again and again and again and again...

Again, one simple explanation

One is called duel meaning while the other is the catalyst theory. Very different.

I have offered one simple explanation. You have yet to identify how one explanation magically changes into two different theories when I OFFERED ONE EXPLANATION.

There are no problems. You point out Joseph Smith was a human being and had misconceptions and made mistakes. That is just human nature. Get over it.

I have no problem with Joseph being flawed, but that doesn't mean we should just stop there and not look at whether it really explains the catalyst theory. I think it fails miserably, but you have always ignored this issue.

I think we may actually be making progress here. The way you identify what is inspired and what is man-made is you speak with God. That's the key you are missing.

Your questions don't piss me off. The only problem I have with you is that you can't seem to grasp my points and come up with an intelligent response. You'll note I'm responding to you point for point here because I feel it is important to drive that home in this thread. That you just are incapable of responding in a reasonable way to anything I'm saying.

I understand well what you are saying. I also understand you are ignorant of a number of LDS issues including the OP. Perhaps you could show why it is supposed to be similar to the tooth fairy, and I will ask you to provide evidence for this assertion.

I'm not ignoring the mythical Spaulding manuscript. If someone wants to offer any proof it really existed like a draft, a sentence, maybe even a punctuation mark from the text - then we can discuss the issue. Until then, there is nothing to discuss.

[_SteelHead]

Tobin,
Is the spaulding manuscript more or less mythical than the non existent, no one has ever seen it, original Abraham writing that you have described?