If plates then God

[MG 2.0]

Earlier in the thread, as I’ve said, I have already discussed this. Existing plates would create a number of conundrums that would directly impact the Plan of Salvation and the doctrine of separation from God and living by faith.

Regards,
MG

Yeah. And I notice you didn't answer my response to that.

I didn’t because on its face it didn’t make sense.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Would you be willing to post a PDF of that letter for us to see?

Thanks.

Regards,
MG

I'm not sure I can do it properly. Here is a direct link that has a photo of the original along with a transcript:

Joseph Smith to Oliver Cowdery 22 Oct 1829

Thank you.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

Incredible. Joseph referring to the enterprise as "the Gold Book business" in 1829. That's probably the term I would have used having had just met Jesus and Heavenly Father and the Angel Moroni.

Jeez. No wonder Daniel Peterson was so opposed to the Joseph Smith Papers project.

[tagriffy]

I am saying that we ought not to disregard and pass by what her actual words say. We should be open to giving her the benefit of a doubt until we have reason not to. Both Joseph and Emma’s ‘sincerity’ factor should be taken into account. And the sacrifices that they went through over many years.

A lot of ‘stuff’ to support a lie.

They were sincere believers in the restoration and never denied their testimonies.

All I’m saying is that one should not have a closed mind to accepting the facts as they were understood by witnesses at the time.

And they believed the plates were real.

Regards,
MG

No one who is seriously engaging you here is saying we ought to disregard what Emma said. What we are saying is that we need to weigh her story carefully, including keeping in mind her story was recorded some forty to fifty years after the fact, that she had incentive to tell the story the way she did, and that contemporary evidence in some cases shows she was demonstrably wrong. That's not necessarily an impeachment of her sincerity.

[tagriffy]

Yeah. And I notice you didn't answer my response to that.

I didn’t because on its face it didn’t make sense.

Regards,
MG

Then please ask questions. What do you need me to clarify?

[MG 2.0]

I’ll repeat my last sentence in the post you’re referring to.

“If the plates were real that opens up some possibilities that some folks would rather not entertain.”

As it stands, that sentence is true.

And I’m also saying that this…obviously…is why you and others go to great lengths to disregard and/or diss the testimony of Emma and others, including women, who testified that the plates were real.

You CAN’T have real plates.

NO MATTER WHAT.

Real plates would change your whole worldview.

Right?

If plates, then God. And the God of Mormonism no less.

Regards,
MG

Again, there is a simple solution to that--produce the plates.

tagriffy, earlier in this thread I asked you if you were an active believing member of the church. Are you willing to share whether you are or aren’t?

To me, your positions seem to be a bit ‘off’. If you are not a believer in the literal restoration narrative I can clearly see why your comments are somewhat out of the mainstream.

And that’s OK. I would expect that someone who doesn’t believe in the essential components of the restoration narrative to have views that might contradict the accepted narrative.

And if you are an active and believing member of the church and in full standing, that’s OK too. There are a lot of us that may not fit the Peter Priesthood mold in all aspects.

So I’m just curious and if you’re willing to share, great. If not, then I guess we’ll/I’ll just have to guess.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I think it would make a huge difference in the Plan of Salvation if we didn’t have to exercise real faith. The gospel teaches that we are separated from God and the things of eternity by a veil.

If we had access to the plates and the translation was on the shelves of every university and available throughout the world at will…that would put a monkey wrench into this thing we call Faith.

As it is, we are left to choose to believe and obey based upon incomplete information and knowledge.

It’s a bitch, right?

Regards,
MG

ARGH! Even if we had access to the plates and the translation was on the shelves of every university and available throughout the world at will, we would still have to have faith! If the plates were available and shown to be translated accurately, what would that tell us about the statement, "For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things" (2 Ne. 2:11)? Not a damned thing! "An opposition in all things" is an abstract concept that isn't amendable to evidence and indeed is beyond the realm of evidence. One accepts the notion (or not) on faith. And this is just one of many concepts in the Book of Mormon that are beyond the realm of evidence and must be accepted on faith. Having physical plates and showing Lehi won't change that.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I didn’t because on its face it didn’t make sense.

Regards,
MG

Then please ask questions. What do you need me to clarify?

See previous post.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Well that was completely desperate. What's the reason for your panic?

Please stop trolling....

The panic and desperation in your post was palpable. I am asking, what was the reason?

[Res Ipsa]

The fact that MG 2.0 talks about "possibilities" demonstrates that, whatever he's doing, he's not attempting to make a serious evaluation of evidence.

I’ll repeat my last sentence in the post you’re referring to.

“If the plates were real that opens up some possibilities that some folks would rather not entertain.”

As it stands, that sentence is true.

And I’m also saying that this…obviously…is why you and others go to great lengths to disregard and/or diss the testimony of Emma and others, including women, who testified that the plates were real.

You CAN’T have real plates.

NO MATTER WHAT.

Real plates would change your whole worldview.

Right?

If plates, then God. And the God of Mormonism no less.

Regards,
MG

If Xenu were real, that opens up some possibilities that some folks would rather not entertain. That has absolutely no bearing on whether Xenu is real. Your whole argument here is nonsensical.

I've never argued, and never will argue, that it is impossible that an angel really did give young Smith some gold plates inscribed with reformed Egyptian that were the records of real Jews and their descendants who traveled to America around 600 BC. So, this notion that I'm afraid of possibilities is something you've made up in your own head. The same with your completely made reasons for the way I evaluate evidence concerning the plates.

I haven't disregarded, let alone "dissed" (you're so obvious in your bias, it's painful) Emma Smith's statement. And your insinuation that there is sexism at work is disingenuous as hell. I'm treating what Emma said in the interview as I would any other motivated witness in a friendly interview about events that happened 50 years before. If what you linked to is, indeed, a snippet from a longer interview in which he she argues for her son as Smith's rightful successor and denies that Smith practiced polygamy, then what she says about the plates is even less trustworthy. Again, that doesn't mean that she's consciously lying. What we remember and how we interpret what we remember can be just as motivated as our reasoning.

What you're doing is highly privileging this statement of Emma's over how we would normally assess statements of a motivated witness about decades-old events. There is nothing about Emma herself or about the situation she was in when she gave that interview that should lead us to conclude her recollection is more trustworthy than that of any other witness in her situation. Using the word "testimony" to describe it doesn't make it more trustworthy or special somehow.

I understand apologetic reasoning, and what you are doing is projecting onto me. Yes, when you argue here, you assume the truth of the conclusion that the LDS church is the real, genuine resorted church of Jesus Christ. That doesn't mean that the rest of us argue in this backwards manner.

I'm interested in figuring out the truth to the extent I can, realizing that there are serious limitations on my access to the evidence I need. Yes, if the plates really were what Smith claimed them to be, that would cause me to draw different conclusions about the LDS church than my current conclusions. But that involves assessing all the evidence we have about the plates. And the totality of the evidence about the plates is that, whatever they were, they weren't what Smith claimed they were.

Once again, not impossible. You have plenty of room for your faith to bridge the gap between the evidence and what you believe. That's what it's for. But your ad hoc, completely motivated approach to evidence isn't the way someone who is interested in truth weighs and evaluates evidence.