YellowLight

The kinderhook plates are located at the Chicago Historical Society.

I called Borders and had them order it for me. Should get in it a few days.

That is my point exactly. It has been said many times, it doesn't matter if things are represented differently than how they really happened because the church is true. Maybe for you, it doesn't, but for me it does. History gets mis-represented usually for one reason...we don't want others to know about it. And I don't want the milk before meat analogy as well...history is just that, history. It doesn't change and it is what it is. Boyd K. Packer: “Church history can be so interesting and so inspiring as to be a very powerful tool indeed for building faith. If not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer.” Here is another question: For those of you who are familiar with the Kinderhook plates, why did Joseph Smith write the following: "I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters. I have translated a portion of them and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth." (History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 372) I have heard some apologists saying that it wasn't actually a translation, but reading this, it was. It is so obvious...and we now know that these were a fraud. Why doesn't the church just be up front and honest about it? This was one of the first things that caught my attention and my Bishop had absolutely no answer for it. Maybe someone here can enlighten me.

Is it really or is that just a mormon myth? Also, one question that I have been trying to find out is this: On the hill Cumorah, where is the stone box that the golden plates were removed from. It seems that this alone would provide such a distinct proof of the book of mormon. Also, we know that Smith returned the plates to the hill Cumorah. There are many varying accounts of how they were returned. This is from the JoD: Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 17 June 1877 Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did. Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room. He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light; but that it was just as light as day. They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in the corners and along the walls. The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: "This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ." I tell you this as coming not only from Oliver Cowdery, but others who were familiar with it, and who understood it just as well as we understand coming to this meeting. . . . [Don] Carlos Smith was a young man of as much veracity as any young man we had, and he was a witness to these things. Samuel Smith saw some things, Hyrum saw a good many things, but Joseph was the leader.

That is such a good idea. I think I will start this tonight. Thanks!!!

That's the thing. I am willing to accept flaws in people and such, but I don't think many people know how difficult it is when you are told that you are allowed to have your own opinions as long as you don't discuss them. I don't want my own opinions, I want to talk about questions that seem to bother some people in the church. It seems to me that you have had almost the exact same questions. How were you able to get over the questions you had?

LOL...it expired a few months ago, and with the current chaotic state that I am in, I don't think it would be appropriate to enter the temple. Unfortunately, I know that if I were to write the leadership of the church, it will get forwarded to my local leaders who will undoubtedly tell me not to question. And we go round and round.

I have another question. This is not a doctrinal question. If there are certain things in the temple endowment video that contradict the scriptures, is there anyone I can talk to about those? They are simple questions, like why is it presented this way, when it is this way type of thing. I would be willing to PM someone the questions if they are willing to take a stab at it. Just let me know if this is allowed as no one has come forward with answers.

I am heading out of work and will be online later once I get home. Unfortunately, I live 35 miles away...I hate traffic. Anyway, thanks thus far with the questions. I will post a few other questions I have later tongiht, hopefully not using the work "peepstone" or anything.

Thank you. This has to be the most frustrating thing I have ever encountered. It seems that you have been faced with what I am going through. You have questions...what...you must be reading ANTI literature. Then again, thanks to all who are sincerely answering my questions.

San Francisco

Trust me, I am not Anti. And no, I don't know who D. Michael Quinn is but I guess I can google this person. My guess is that he/she is anti by your wording... I am not sure what you mean about the BoM being the same. Of course there have been revisions for things here and there...not sure where you are going with that.

I would consider the origins of the only true and restored gospel a pretty important thing to know. If I didn't think so, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Morningstar...You are right, the Bible has some extremely goofy stories in it. Yet, I think the church should be more open and present church history how it was. Also, I have heard the jumping story as well. Quite funny!

Why did Smith start a "translation" of the fraudulent Kinderhook plates? Joseph Smith writes "I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth." (History of the Church, Vol. 5 page 372) I understand that people are not perfect and so forth, but how and I to believe that he translated the scriptures correclty when he had begun to translate this. Also we know that the Book of Abraham is not a direct translation. I have read many articles on both sides and both agree on this. It is just that the apologists say there is a deeper meaning. What if the BoM is not translated correctly and we are missing the deeper meaning in it?

I don't want to post 2,000 questions here but my first one is this: Why is the taught translation of the book of mormon different than that of how it was really done, with Joesph's peep stone and head in his hat? If I can get an answer from someone, that would be a start.

Yes, I have read the book of mormon over 10 times. However, I have only read the Old Testament once and the New Testament twice. MyDogSkip, you really think the answers I am looking for are in the Book of Mormon? I don't remember anything about the current questions I have coming from that. This is what I am faced with. I am looking for logical answers to real questions. These are questions of history. If I said, who was the 5th president of the U.S., you would say, James Monroe of course. It isn't a question of receiveing anything from the Holy Spirit and I won't find it in the BoM. Do you understand?

First I wanted to thank everyone for their comments and such. It is nice to be able to discuss things in an open forum. Aphrodite, I think you hit the nail on the head with your reply. The majority of questions I have are about church history. I understand the concept that I can't understand or even come close to comprehending many of the mysteries of the universe and the gospel. However, from one little question I had some time ago, it seems that the church is not as candid with it's history as I thought. When certain concepts are taught in church, then you hear them being denounced in public, it make you do a double take. With a simple concept of how the Book of Mormon was translated, why was it shown to me since primary the two pictures of the translation. Both show Smith translating them, but in reality he used hte peep stone interchangably with the urim and thummim in a hat. Many times the plates weren't even in the room. This isn't a translation. This is confirmed by Daniel Peterson and the church does not deny it. Why did I find out about this from South Park? It is the simple things like that that led to even more questions. I could probably write them all out on here, but that might take a while. Once again, I am not seeking the mysteries of Kolob and such, just actual church history the way it actually was. Thank you for listening to my ramblings as I can go for a while. Temple recommend question #4: Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church? I don't think so, not right now...that is why I had put that I could not honestly answer yes to the temple recommend questions.

Hello, I am new to this site. Let me introduce myself. I was born into the church, served a mission, got married in the temple, and was a pretty active member all my life. Some time ago, my wife and I felt there were some things about the church we would like to understand better. We believed a fuller understanding would lead to a deeper faith and conviction of the truthfulness of the gospel. Since then, we have studied more church history and doctrine than the rest of our lives combined. Additionally, we have fasted and prayed fervently, both together and individually, for guidance in finding answers to our questions. We didn’t set out to try and prove anything other than to answer some of the nagging questions we had. As we tried to answer them, even more questions came up. Over the course of our study, we were very careful about the materials we used. We relied heavily on materials produced by the church, including the History of the Church, Journal of Discourses, The Diary of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the scriptures, conference talks, Ensign Articles, and other church publications, as well as books by individual church members and secular historians. We were careful to stay away from rabid “anti-Mormon” literature, especially the “Evangelical Christian” kind, because we could easily tell that many factual things in them had been distorted or exaggerated. In short, we have spent many hours honestly seeking answers out of the best resources possible. We have done this together as well as on our own to make sure that we came to our own individual conclusions. We also attempted to get some resolve from local leaders in the church who told us that we could believe whatever we wanted, as long as we didn't share our opinions with others in the ward. This made no sense to us...we wouldn't be able to answer the temple recommend questions honestly. The one thing we could do is be honest with ourselves. Since then, we have been on many forums trying to work out our feelings and such. Why can't anyone, LDS or non-LDS provide honest answers without beating around the bush? They are brushed off as not being "official" doctrine or the typical resonse of "it doesn't matter" or "that's not what was taught." Lastly, I am not looking to stir up confrontation here at all. There are many other forums that I could do that on.

Pardon me if I am wrong...no one KNOWS. You have a testimony based on faith. Faith in what others have told you and what you consider a feeling of the holy spirit. Therefore, all will have the opportunity to accept the gospel if the spirit world exists. Just my thoughts.

I was BiC and served a mission and even got married in the Temple. However, I have to say...being the devil's advocate here, that my wife and I have not paid any tithing for the last year. That being said...we have received what others would perceive to be blessings. New job opportunities have opened up and we have taken a significant amount to what we would have paid in tithing to other charitable organizations. Maybe God still loves me...

I went to the Oakland temple several times. It's architecture is truly unique.

Hello everyone, I was BiC, but now attend a different church. However, many friends and family are still in the church. I am working on strengthening relationships on more than just religion. Hope to learn a lot for all of you.