Coming to terms with the Book of Abraham

[DKM88]

So this begs the question. Why did you start this thread?

Because the thread was about the Book of Abraham, not the Book of Mormon. It was my attempt to see if I was missing something in my studies. Oftentimes it's a good idea to consult others that may have studied the same material or have had a similar journey.

[bytebear]

Because the thread was about the Book of Abraham, not the Book of Mormon. It was my attempt to see if I was missing something in my studies. Oftentimes it's a good idea to consult others that may have studied the same material or have had a similar journey.

Ok, but you seem to be rejecting every concept and theory and idea thrown out and there seems to be a tendency (and maybe it was other contributors) to accept anti-Mormon theories without question.

[DKM88]

Ok, but you seem to be rejecting every concept and theory and idea thrown out and there seems to be a tendency (and maybe it was other contributors) to accept anti-Mormon theories without question.

I think you're partially correct. I feel pretty closed off. Probably because I've heard all the responses given already, and they just don't make sense to me. Sorry if I came off as attacking.

And I don't accept anti-Mormon theories. I just search for fact and truth. I don't give heed to people that actively try and destroy an organization that does so much good in the world.

[bytebear]

I think you're partially correct. I feel pretty closed off. Probably because I've heard all the responses given already, and they just don't make sense to me. Sorry if I came off as attacking.

And I don't accept anti-Mormon theories. I just search for fact and truth. I don't give heed to people that actively try and destroy an organization that does so much good in the world.

ok. lets start off simple. Do you believe the Book of Moses to be inspired? Could the Book of Abraham come to Smith in a similar fashion? Through inspiration triggered by the scrolls, just as the JST was inspired by the Bible?

Or could there have been more scrolls that are now lost forever, along with the mummy and the rest of the collection? Was the translation literal? Was it spiritual?

Do either of those theories or ideas help reconcile your issues?

[prophetofdoom]

I had a period of my life where I studied every source of anti out there. It led to my inactivity of a few years.

What led me back to the church?

I started to build my testimony of Jesus Christ. The more I learned about Christ, the more I realized that he spoke about many things in parables and stories. I also realized that anything that teaches us more about Jesus Christ to build our testimony on him is of God.

I can accept the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham because they point my soul to Christ. That was how I was able to resolve the internal conflict I had with all of the historical issues that were road blocks to my mind.

[volgadon]

I'm not sure if you are mocking me or if you are serious when you talk about archaeological proof.

Trust me, I'm not mocking you. If you like, I can soften my statement. Extremely rarely do archaeological finds ever ammount to proof of something.

There is absolutely archaeological proof for things. For example, the Book of Mormon claims that there are certain weapons, chariots, animals, food, that only existed in the old world and has never shown up in any archaeological dig. If we found archaeological evidence that steel swords were used by civilizations in the Americas, that would be archaeological proof that at least one thing that the Book of Mormon claims is true.

Ok, would a discovery of a single steel sword be enough, or would you require more. What if it post dates the BoM? What if it were a dagger, or what if a case could be made for it being a plow? What if its composition didn't match modern alloys? Are you sure that you couldn't find an argument to dismiss its significance. I certainly could if I wanted to. What happens if it wasn't a sword

Swords, BTW, are that common a find. Something else to consider is how frequently are steel swords mentioned in the BoM. That should clue you in to the probability of such a find.

Again, I'm not sure how my statement is an oversimplification of the papyri. I think that the issues with the papyri are pretty straightforward.

If you look into the religious and literary activity of Ptolemaic Egypt you will see why the issue isn't straightforward. I'd be more than happy to email you some places to look. I'm not sharing them publically as they are part of a research project of mine.

As far as the burial ground analogy, let's say you did all of your extra research and you couldn't justify or twist my words in a way that would confirm there was an actual burial ground under my house. What then? Do you just say that I was speaking metaphorically, even if I said that there was a literal burial ground? Would you say that even though there wasn't a burial ground, God told me there was one for some other purpose that you can learn from, therefore accepting me a spiritual person and not a liar?

That depends on what the purpose of your telling me is, and whether or not I had recieved a spiritual confirmation.

[xLandonx]

Since nobody has figured it out by now I'm just going to come out and say it. I find it much more likely that DKM88 is an anti posing as a member with a shaken testimony, than a member with a shaken testimony. All reasonable explanations and attempts at consolation have lead to nothing but adamant arguments (not truly taking the new advice/information into account) and paraphrased repeats of the original post.

DKM88, if I'm wrong about you I sincerely apologize. That being said, I'm rarely incorrect about these kinds of assessments.

If I happen to be wrong in the above mentioned statement, here is my advice:

If you are truly somebody who's faith has been shaken you should take more time to consider the advice and information given on this forum and do so with an open mind and an open heart. Also, if your situation is truly as you describe it your method of maintaining or regaining your testimony is fundamentaly flawed. You cannot justify faith or spirituality through history and science. These can be tools to build faith, but they will always be inadequate as a foundation to faith. The main reason for this is because history and science are the compilation of "mans" knowledge. Unfortunately, mans ('humyns', if you want to be politically correct ) knowledge is incomplete. We are constantly learning, and the more we learn to more our understanding changes. You cannot take any historical evidence, both supporting and opposing a spiritual idea as an absolute truth. Why? Because it is not an absolute truth, it is an incomplete knowledge. Just because there is an information conflict does not mean something, like the church, or the BoA should be discarded. Conflicts exist, this is one of the only true "facts" of life. You want a good example of everything I've stated in this paragraph, try applying Newtonian laws of physics to quantum mechanics. This is a secular example of how two things can be considered (generaly) true, but create conflict when put together. In this secular example we know that both are true in their own way, but do to an imperfect understanding we cannot reconcile these two principals. Information is needed that we don't have. This is why you cannot base spiritual belief on mans knowledge, because there is always information we need, that historically and scientifically we might not have. You need to put more energy into concentrating on the spiritual side of spirituality, and not the secular side of spirituality.

Edited September 6, 2011 by xLandonx

[ConvinceTheWorld]

If you read the book of moses or book of abraham you cant really deny that is inspired. They are really the best books we got.

[Spartan117]

Thanks for the condescending history lesson, but I know all about Church history and what went on. The difference, it seems, is that I've read all the accounts given, not just the apologetic account. And it seems that the more I look into these things, the apologetic accounts are seeming to hold less and less weight.

The reason 1+1=3 for you is because you've mixed up the numbers. Why do the apologetic accounts hold less weight exactly? The "history" presented by anti-Mormons, do you believe it's unbiased? You've done a lot of research into this Book of Abraham stuff, and what you've presented so far as the "official" story is incomplete, inaccurate and stitched together to show as many inconsistencies as possible. Which I now believe is a very intentional thing, whether or not it was penned by your hand or not is irrelevant. You've made it clear that you want an explanation on a specific version of events, and any other accounts of the events you're asking about (that by the way, cleared up these decades old arguments that you keep parroting) are ignored because ... why?

If the gospel is true, wouldn't it be proved by archaeology? I don't get it. How can so many people see things that don't make sense or are blatantly wrong and still say, "I've got faith, so I believe 1+1=3, because it feels good when I say it." Don't you see how asinine that is?

If only someone had posted information about archeology work that has corroborated teachings and practices that are exclusive to LDS theology because of modern day revelation, things like the endowment being performed in ancient times, or the degrees of glory and how you return to God the Father by passing through a veil after demonstrating your knowledge of teachings revealed only to "worthy initiates", the premortal existence, council in heaven, war in heaven, if only there were 2,000 year old early Christian texts that were discovered in 1945 in Egypt that contain writings and about Christ teaching the apostles what their souls are to say and do at each gate in heaven so the guard would let them through to the next kingdom until they reach the celestial heights.

Or maybe someone can just flat out make things up to try and get people to leave the church. They can't "prove" the church is a false church, so they fabricate evidence of events that never happened, or things that were never said. Then they kill everyone who finds out they've been forging documents and lying to everyone. Then they spend the rest of their life in prison.

So answer this for me, if it is "widespread knowledge" that Joseph Smith was a fraud, which has been has been clearly proven to everyone, I guess, and his works are fake, why do the people who are the most dedicated to bringing down the church make up stuff to try and prove Joseph was a fraud? If he is a liar, and his works are fake, why the need for forged documents and fabricated evidence? 180 years and no one can bring him down?

I first thought you were on the fence about this, I no longer believe that. I think you're arguing in circles, waiting to feel better about your choice.

[DKM88]

The reason 1+1=3 for you is because you've mixed up the numbers. Why do the apologetic accounts hold less weight exactly? The "history" presented by anti-Mormons, do you believe it's unbiased? You've done a lot of research into this Book of Abraham stuff, and what you've presented so far as the "official" story is incomplete, inaccurate and stitched together to show as many inconsistencies as possible. Which I now believe is a very intentional thing, whether or not it was penned by your hand or not is irrelevant. You've made it clear that you want an explanation on a specific version of events, and any other accounts of the events you're asking about (that by the way, cleared up these decades old arguments that you keep parroting) are ignored because ... why?

If only someone had posted information about archeology work that has corroborated teachings and practices that are exclusive to LDS theology because of modern day revelation, things like the endowment being performed in ancient times, or the degrees of glory and how you return to God the Father by passing through a veil after demonstrating your knowledge of teachings revealed only to "worthy initiates", the premortal existence, council in heaven, war in heaven, if only there were 2,000 year old early Christian texts that were discovered in 1945 in Egypt that contain writings and about Christ teaching the apostles what their souls are to say and do at each gate in heaven so the guard would let them through to the next kingdom until they reach the celestial heights.

Or maybe someone can just flat out make things up to try and get people to leave the church. They can't "prove" the church is a false church, so they fabricate evidence of events that never happened, or things that were never said. Then they kill everyone who finds out they've been forging documents and lying to everyone. Then they spend the rest of their life in prison.

So answer this for me, if it is "widespread knowledge" that Joseph Smith was a fraud, which has been has been clearly proven to everyone, I guess, and his works are fake, why do the people who are the most dedicated to bringing down the church make up stuff to try and prove Joseph was a fraud? If he is a liar, and his works are fake, why the need for forged documents and fabricated evidence? 180 years and no one can bring him down?

I first thought you were on the fence about this, I no longer believe that. I think you're arguing in circles, waiting to feel better about your choice.

I'm not referring to anti Mormons. This is a major problem with many Mormons when discussing issues in the church. As soon as the position towards the church is less than positive, it immediately is dismissed as "anti", which really isn't the case here. But please, tell what exactly that I've said makes my assessment incomplete. Aside from the "spiritual witness" that you have, I haven't seen anything where you've filled in the gaps to my so-called stitched together story. I'm not trying to be rude, just looking for answers.

Do me a favor and do some research on the actual membership numbers of the Church. They are very secretive about this, but everything you can find points to major issues in this area. We are told the Church is growing, but reality is there are probably somewhere around 2.5 million members that are active. The Church will always grow, depending on how numbers are represented. I think the Church may be in some trouble, and they know it. They are working to try and keep people active, especially the YSA and SA crowd. I'm not looking for an argument here, but just look into it.

As far as "taking Joseph down", lol, that's not my intent here. There is ample evidence/stories that confirm his prophetic calling as well as show him to be a fraud. There's no way to really know 100% what the answer is. Is it possible that he was a prophet? Sure. Is it possible that he was a fraud? Depends. I believe that whether Joseph was really a prophet or not, HE believed he was. And frankly, people that have nothing to do with the Church don't care whether he was a liar or a prophet. The only people you see debating about this are historians with connections to the church, ex-mormons, mormon apologists, and fence-sitting mormons. This is a VERY small group of people. So aside from the conversations that you might find in a mormon community, you'll rarely, if ever, hear anyone talk about Joseph Smith and what he did.

On a side note, since you clandestinely brought it up, I'm actually related to Mark Hofmann. I don't know the guy, but my impression is he was in the forgery business for the money. He didn't start killing people until he was being found out. I'm not sure why he was brought into this, but whatever.

So when I can't get an answer that make sense beyond the "maybe it was inspired but not translated" and "pray", I'm arguing in circles? Do you realize how ridiculous all of these responses are? Sure, in the church we understand them and they make sense to us, but put yourself in an investigators shoes. You have questions about the validity of the Book of Abraham. Now read the apologist responses. If the investigator has any critical thinking skills at all he's running the other direction. What I'm saying is as members of the Church there has to be a better way at tackling this issue than what we have, because it doesn't work.

Edited September 6, 2011 by DKM88

[FlaviusHambonius]

Since nobody has figured it out by now I'm just going to come out and say it. I find it much more likely that DKM88 is an anti posing as a member with a shaken testimony, than a member with a shaken testimony. All reasonable explanations and attempts at consolation have lead to nothing but adamant arguments (not truly taking the new advice/information into account) and paraphrased repeats of the original post.

DKM88, if I'm wrong about you I sincerely apologize. That being said, I'm rarely incorrect about these kinds of assessments.

The 'Amazing Kreskin' has spoken -- "even now I know what you are thinking"

[bytebear]

Do me a favor and do some research on the actual membership numbers of the Church. They are very secretive about this, but everything you can find points to major issues in this area. We are told the Church is growing, but reality is there are probably somewhere around 2.5 million members that are active. The Church will always grow, depending on how numbers are represented. I think the Church may be in some trouble, and they know it. They are working to try and keep people active, especially the YSA and SA crowd. I'm not looking for an argument here, but just look into it.

You know, I was rooting for you right until you did this post. You aren't just critical of the Book of Abraham. You are critical of every aspect of the church, pulling your arguments right from the anti-Mormon playbook, including the tactic of throwing out additional criticisms when your original criticism can no longer be defended reasonably. The church builds a new chapel a day. The only problem the church has is that too many members are joining in areas where there isn't enough leadership to guide them properly. To say it isn't growing is naive if not downright deceptive. If anything, they are growing too fast. You really need to work on your technique, you have overplayed your hand.

By the way, your estimate of 2.5 million active members is ridiculous. As of 2009, there were 2865 stakes and 28,424 wards (that's just under 10 wards per stake). By your calculations that would be 87 active members per ward. And that's not counting branches or districts. Are you still gonna stick with that statistic?

Edited September 6, 2011 by bytebear

[livy111us]

The papyri really are a bunch of pictures and symbols. He got the picture wrong. How is telling us the story on an Egyptian papyri any different than translation? It IS translation. He translated a picture that the Egyptians understood in the hieroglyphic language and told us what it meant. And he was wrong. I accept that.

How much have you read from LDS Egyptologists on the subject? Joseph Smith got many things right which is quite the accomplishment since much of the information wasn't known in Joseph Smiths day. If he only got one thing right, it would be VERY impressive, but how could he get numerous things right? What source is he using to correctly interpret ancient papyrus? Facsimiles aside, the book of Abraham also does a very good job in ancient geography, Egyptian presence, ancient droughts, human sacrifice, word translations, astronomy, Abrahamic traditions, and more. I believe this goes beyond luck and we must ask how this book gets so many things right that just weren't known in JS day.

FAIR has a DVD that will be released in a few weeks on the book of Abraham which discusses all of these issues and more. I saw it during lunch at the FAIR conference and think it will answer many of your questions. Obviously you have many other concerns on top of the BOA, but you should realize that there are valid arguments in behalf of the book of Abraham that should be considered.

John Gee wrote a brief review on the arguments surrounding the BOA which you can read here:

A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri by John Gee

Hugh Nibley's Abraham in Egypt can be read here:

Abraham in Egypt by Hugh W. Nibley

and the more recent Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant which is a series of essays written by scholars on topics ranging from geocentric view in the BOA to chapter 125 of the book of the dead and facsimile 3. It's a great read.

Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant by John Gee, and Brian M. Hauglid

Of course, the ever popular FAIR wiki discusses the major talking points of the BOA. Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri - FAIRMormon

[Vort]

Lol, ok. Go ahead and direct me. Where are their arguments NOT flawed and their evidence NOT far fetched?

Okay, but before I do, I want you to give me a number. Tell me how many unflawed arguments from FAIR/Maxwell Institute I have to provide and how many pieces of non-farfetched evidence from FAIR/Maxwell Institute I have to cite before you will admit that you are wrong. I don't want to provide, say, three examples, and then have you say, "No, those three aren't enough."

You made a statement, and your statement is flawed. I am willing to provide the evidence you claim to require, but first, give me a firm number of items I need to provide after which you will freely and fully admit that you are wrong.

[DKM88]

The reason 1+1=3 for you is because you've mixed up the numbers. Why do the apologetic accounts hold less weight exactly? The "history" presented by anti-Mormons, do you believe it's unbiased? You've done a lot of research into this Book of Abraham stuff, and what you've presented so far as the "official" story is incomplete, inaccurate and stitched together to show as many inconsistencies as possible. Which I now believe is a very intentional thing, whether or not it was penned by your hand or not is irrelevant. You've made it clear that you want an explanation on a specific version of events, and any other accounts of the events you're asking about (that by the way, cleared up these decades old arguments that you keep parroting) are ignored because ... why?

If only someone had posted information about archeology work that has corroborated teachings and practices that are exclusive to LDS theology because of modern day revelation, things like the endowment being performed in ancient times, or the degrees of glory and how you return to God the Father by passing through a veil after demonstrating your knowledge of teachings revealed only to "worthy initiates", the premortal existence, council in heaven, war in heaven, if only there were 2,000 year old early Christian texts that were discovered in 1945 in Egypt that contain writings and about Christ teaching the apostles what their souls are to say and do at each gate in heaven so the guard would let them through to the next kingdom until they reach the celestial heights.

Or maybe someone can just flat out make things up to try and get people to leave the church. They can't "prove" the church is a false church, so they fabricate evidence of events that never happened, or things that were never said. Then they kill everyone who finds out they've been forging documents and lying to everyone. Then they spend the rest of their life in prison.

So answer this for me, if it is "widespread knowledge" that Joseph Smith was a fraud, which has been has been clearly proven to everyone, I guess, and his works are fake, why do the people who are the most dedicated to bringing down the church make up stuff to try and prove Joseph was a fraud? If he is a liar, and his works are fake, why the need for forged documents and fabricated evidence? 180 years and no one can bring him down?

I first thought you were on the fence about this, I no longer believe that. I think you're arguing in circles, waiting to feel better about your choice.

You know, I was rooting for you right until you did this post. You aren't just critical of the Book of Abraham. You are critical of every aspect of the church, pulling your arguments right from the anti-Mormon playbook, including the tactic of throwing out additional criticisms when your original criticism can no longer be defended reasonably. The church builds a new chapel a day. The only problem the church has is that too many members are joining in areas where there isn't enough leadership to guide them properly. To say it isn't growing is naive if not downright deceptive. If anything, they are growing too fast. You really need to work on your technique, you have overplayed your hand.

By the way, your estimate of 2.5 million active members is ridiculous. As of 2009, there were 2865 stakes and 28,424 wards (that's just under 10 wards per stake). By your calculations that would be 87 active members per ward. Are you still gonna stick with that statistic?

Oh come on. The only reason I brought this up is because you made a reference to nobody being able to take the church down after all these years. I was simply making a reference to the fact that oftentimes as members of the church we look at it like this ball of fire blazing through the world at light speed, when in reality it's not the case. The numbers we see are statistics. And we all know what Twain said about statistics...

And yes, I'll stick with that statistic. Have you ever been to church outside of the Western US? In my mission most of the branches I was in had around 400-500 members on the list with about 10-50 actually going. So yeah, I'm relatively confident. I could be wrong though, it's just a guess.

[bytebear]

Oh come on. The only reason I brought this up is because you made a reference to nobody being able to take the church down after all these years. I was simply making a reference to the fact that oftentimes as members of the church we look at it like this ball of fire blazing through the world at light speed, when in reality it's not the case. The numbers we see are statistics. And we all know what Twain said about statistics...

Your "statistics" estimate 87 active members per ward. And you are chastising me?

[DKM88]

Okay, but before I do, I want you to give me a number. Tell me how many unflawed arguments from FAIR/Maxwell Institute I have to provide and how many pieces of non-farfetched evidence from FAIR/Maxwell Institute I have to cite before you will admit that you are wrong. I don't want to provide, say, three examples, and then have you say, "No, those three aren't enough."

You made a statement, and your statement is flawed. I am willing to provide the evidence you claim to require, but first, give me a firm number of items I need to provide after which you will freely and fully admit that you are wrong.

Provide one argument that isn't flawed. Does that work for you?

[DKM88]

Your "statistics" estimate 87 active members per ward. And you are chastising me?

Not at all. You notice that I continued to use the term statistics in my own assessment. I apologize if you didn't pick that up.

[RipplecutBuddha]

2Nephi 9:28

28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

Here's what it all boils down to DKM88. You either have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet or you do not. If you have a testimony that Joseph Smith truly was a chosen Prophet of God, then the Book of Abraham (by rational conclusion) is every bit true and accurate. This would mean that what you currently believe about the Book of Abraham is inaccurate.

On the other hand, if you do not have a testimony that Joseph Smith was a true Prophet of God, then everything he said and did must be called into question.

In or out, that's the choice. Prayerfully consider both and take the question to God the Father himself. When you are willing to accept the answer, whatever that answer is, he will give it to you in an unmistakeable way. Until then, you'll never know for sure. I should know. I spent six years not knowing for sure. I got my answer and you can too.

We cannot prove anything to you here. If anything about the LDS church could have been proven true beyond rational question, it would have already been done. That's why religion (especially the LDS church) relies upon faith. If you cannot exercise faith, then religion will be a challenge to you no matter where you turn. The fact that your ideas have been consistently challenged since Joseph Smith's day shows there's more to the issue than what you've considered thus far. I would study it out further with serious prayer before reaching any conclusions.

Edited September 6, 2011 by RipplecutBuddha

[bytebear]

Not at all. You notice that I continued to use the term statistics in my own assessment. I apologize if you didn't pick that up.

No, I got it. I am just pointing out that your arguments are flawed, and they are suspiciously reminiscent to anti-Mormon rhetoric. Let me ask, how would you answer the standard Temple questions, particularly about a belief in Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, the Restored Gospel, and the LDS Church?

[DKM88]

2Nephi 9:28

28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

Here's what it all boils down to DKM88. You either have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet or you do not. If you have a testimony that Joseph Smith truly was a chosen Prophet of God, then the Book of Abraham (by rational conclusion) is every bit true and accurate. This would mean that what you currently believe about the Book of Abraham is inaccurate.

On the other hand, if you do not have a testimony that Joseph Smith was a true Prophet of God, then everything he said and did must be called into question.

In or out, that's the choice. Prayerfully consider both and take the question to God the Father himself. When you are willing to accept the answer, whatever that answer is, he will give it to you in an unmistakeable way. Until then, you'll never know for sure. I should know. I spent six years not knowing for sure. I got my answer and you can too.

We cannot prove anything to you here. If anything about the LDS church could have been proven true beyond rational question, it would have already been done. That's why religion (especially the LDS church) relies upon faith. If you cannot exercise faith, then religion will be a challenge to you no matter where you turn. The fact that your ideas have been consistently challenged since Joseph Smith's day shows there's more to the issue than what you've considered thus far. I would study it out further with serious prayer before reaching any conclusions.

I continue my study and prayer. This is all part of it. So you're saying I can't be a fence sitter? There is no middle ground in Mormonism? Can I believe that it's man-made, that it's a great church, and raise my kids in it, and still get to the celestial kingdom? Isn't what God wants me to do is seek truth? If I earnestly do so and this is what I come up with, will God fault me for it?

[Vort]

Provide one argument that isn't flawed. Does that work for you?

Let me understand you correctly. You are saying that if I provide for you one single argument from FAIR/The Maxwell Institute that is not flawed, you will withdraw your accusation and admit that you are wrong?

[DKM88]

No, I got it. I am just pointing out that your arguments are flawed, and they are suspiciously reminiscent to anti-Mormon rhetoric. Let me ask, how would you answer the standard Temple questions, particularly about a belief in Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, the Restored Gospel, and the LDS Church?

I understand the anti stuff. I'm just bringing in facts, and its true that many antis use those facts to their advantage, I'm sure. But I still view them as facts, so we need to tackle them a different way.

As far as TR questions go, I'd say that I do have faith in JC. What I mean by faith is a hope that it's all real, that he's my savior. Do I believe that I could be wrong? Sure! I mean, there are millions of muslims around the world that claim spiritual manifestations that tell them that Islam is the true religion, and how can I fault them for that? I don't see it any differently than me claiming to have faith in JC. My belief that JS was a prophet, I always say that I hope so. It usually gets a smile out of the Bishop or SP. Same with the restored gospel. I say I have a hope.

I'm sorry if it offends some people that I won't say that "I KNOW" these things, because nobody "knows" anything.

[DKM88]

Let me understand you correctly. You are saying that if I provide for you one single argument from FAIR/The Maxwell Institute that is not flawed, you will withdraw your accusation and admit that you are wrong?

Absolutely. I'm probably going to go to bed, so I'll check back tomorrow afternoon and see what you've come up with. Good luck to you, my friend. I'm being serious. I haven't found any arguments that aren't flawed, so if you find one, awesome! You will have helped me tremendously.

[bytebear]

I continue my study and prayer. This is all part of it. So you're saying I can't be a fence sitter? There is no middle ground in Mormonism? Can I believe that it's man-made, that it's a great church, and raise my kids in it, and still get to the celestial kingdom? Isn't what God wants me to do is seek truth? If I earnestly do so and this is what I come up with, will God fault me for it?

Ultimately you must make a decision. But it's not so much about making a decision as it is about finding peace and love in this life. I believe there are great blessings out there that you are not partaking of because you are finding fault around every corner. No man can serve two masters. You can live and hope, but you seem unwilling to look for a spiritual confirmation or even a spiritual connection to Jesus Christ. You seem to think Jesus is just a fairy tale that we tell each other so we feel better about ourselves. That is your flaw, and that is ultmately why you cannot find joy in this life. You will always be chasing "proof" and always finding a way out of the evidence.