omegaseamaster75

Historical accuracy of the BOM

Historical Accuracy  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. How does the Historical Accuracy relate to my belief in the BOM

    • I view it as a historical and Scriptural document and 100% True
      9
    • I think that there is enough circumstantial evidence to make a claim of historical accuracy, but it's not a deal breaker it's still true
      5
    • There is no historical evidence to back up the BOM, and the stories are allegorical in nature but it is still scripture and true
      2
    • JS made it up and it is false
      2


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Thank you for the references I will look into these

This was JS opinion, he also thought that the native americans were Lamanites...

God calls them Lamanites in the D&C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, UtahTexan said:

How good a missionary can you be if the people you teach know you lied about God just to stay alive?

If I was in the military, how good of a missionary could I be if the people I teach knew I killed people?

Sinners teach people all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Section and verse please. 

D&C 54:8

And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, rpframe said:

D&C 54:8

And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.

Thank you for the reference, Some fact checking http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Geography/Borders_of_the_Lamanites#cite_note-3

Pretty ambiguous, and caveats have been made to accommodate native americans.  I'm not buying it, JS thought that native americans were literal descendants I do not believe that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

This was JS opinion, he also thought that the native americans were Lamanites...

Some are, some may not be. Exogamy being what it is, and the fact of (classical) rape's being a widespread practice the world around, and notably in the Americas, it would surprise me not at all to find out that all Indians have an ancestor from the Land of Jerusalem.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Pretty ambiguous, and caveats have been made to accommodate native americans.  I'm not buying it, JS thought that native americans were literal descendants I do not believe that.

There are additional references where various persons were sent on missions to teach the gospel to the Lamanites. But you are right, the term "Lamanite" is vague hundreds of years after the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rpframe said:

If I was in the military, how good of a missionary could I be if the people I teach knew I killed people?

Sinners teach people all the time.

A darn good one.  David killed.  Moses killed.  Abraham killed.  The list is long.

Maybe we Texans are just sturdier folk...willing to die for what we believe and rather die than Deny Heavenly Father.

Joseph Smith has done much for the Church AFTER his death....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, UtahTexan said:

Maybe we Texans are just sturdier folk...willing to die for what we believe and rather die than Deny Heavenly Father.

I'm from West Houston.

4 minutes ago, UtahTexan said:

Joseph Smith has done much for the Church AFTER his death....

Right.. and as I said... I'm not a prophet or an apostle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rpframe said:

I'm from West Houston.

Right.. and as I said... I'm not a prophet or an apostle. 

Then maybe you are a yankee who moved to Texas :)

That is your excuse for cowardice?  You are not a prophet or apostle?  Is that what you will tell Christ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a lot of judgement based on hypothetical that really the only one who could ever judge that situation is Christ. I could stand before God and say, no, I did not take a gun to my face for no reason, to satisfy a crazy person. How is that standing up for the truth of the gospel? Does that bring any one to Christ? I'd be willing to be told I was wrong, by Christ, but that's the only one I would accept judgement from. Joseph defended himself. Joseph had a gun. And Joseph saw God and Jesus Christ, not just going on faith alone. He was called, yet he still fought to the end.

President Faust said, "For most of us, however, what is required is not to die for the Church but to live for it. For many, living a Christlike life every day may be even more difficult than laying down one’s life." I'd be more worried about responding to Christ when he asks me, "Why did you take the easy way out and sacrifice the greatest gift I have given you and bring no souls until me, when you could have lived out your days showing everyone around you who I am through your example?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Pretty big talk from behind a keyboard, you sure showed him.

I am not just behind a keyboard.  I served as a missionary in Honduras, and I served my country in the Army.  

Plus, from my smiley, I hope the humor element was noticed.

But, I stand behind my sadness that people are too afraid to stand for their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, UtahTexan said:

But, I stand behind my sadness that people are too afraid to stand for their beliefs.

Dying for your beliefs is easy.

Living for your beliefs is hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For whoever was wanting to trip over an ancient Nephite sword as evidence, check out this article today.

This sword tip is heavily corroded - and apparently from 1836. I'm thinking based on this, in a few thousand years it will be completely gone. No?

The last Nephites died around 400 AD, so probably not any Nephite swords are going to be found lying on the ground.

Alamo dig: Archaeologists unearth tip of Mexican sword | Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/08/12/alamo-dig-archaeologists-unearth-tip-mexican-sword.html

1471018379972.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2016 at 3:05 PM, LeSellers said:

Nonetheless, there were three men who also saw Moroni: David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris.

And apparently, at least one woman.

On 8/11/2016 at 4:25 PM, omegaseamaster75 said:

We know that JS never translated directly from the plates he had in his possession it was all by revelation through the seer stone.

In point of fact, we don't know that.  The weight of the evidence is that the brown seer stone was used after the lost pages incident; but not necessarily before.  Lucy Mack Smith recalled Joseph's use of the Nephite interpreters, and it seems there may have been at least one other seer stone involved too.  Moreover, the testimony of the Three Witnesses states that they heard God Himself vouch for the accuracy of the translation Joseph produced as it related to the engravings on the actual plates.

On 8/11/2016 at 5:24 PM, UtahTexan said:

No...the Melchizedek Priesthood.

And that is the problem...it was something for which he needed to repent.

Spencer W. Kimball didn't think so, FWIW.  He read "Thou shalt deny me thrice" as prescriptive, not predictive, in nature--in other words, under this theory, Peter denied Jesus because Jesus Himself had told him to.

I'm not sure how much credence I give to the idea, but it at least keeps me from getting too strident with my criticisms of Peter.
 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

And apparently, at least one woman.

In point of fact, we don't know that.  The weight of the evidence is that the brown seer stone was used after the lost pages incident; but not necessarily before.  Lucy Mack Smith recalled Joseph's use of the Nephite interpreters, and it seems there may have been at least one other seer stone involved too.  Moreover, the testimony of the Three Witnesses states that they heard God Himself vouch for the accuracy of the translation Joseph produced as it related to the engravings on the actual plates.

Spencer W. Kimball didn't think so, FWIW.  He read "Thou shalt deny me thrice" as prescriptive, not predictive, in nature--in other words, under this theory, Peter denied Jesus because Jesus Himself had told him to.

I'm not sure how much credence I give to the idea, but it at least keeps me from getting too strident with my criticisms of Peter.
 

I am not critical of peter at all....I simply said I hope to learn from that.  Peter was deeply ashamed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2016 at 5:25 PM, omegaseamaster75 said:

We know that JS never translated directly from the plates he had in his possession it was all by revelation through the seer stone. 

10 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

In point of fact, we don't know that.  The weight of the evidence is that the brown seer stone was used after the lost pages incident; but not necessarily before.  Lucy Mack Smith recalled Joseph's use of the Nephite interpreters, and it seems there may have been at least one other seer stone involved too. 

Adding to what JAG already shared:  Book of Mormon Translation - lds.org
"Joseph Smith and his scribes wrote of two instruments used in translating the Book of Mormon. According to witnesses of the translation, when Joseph looked into the instruments, the words of scripture appeared in English. One instrument, called in the Book of Mormon the “interpreters,” is better known to Latter-day Saints today as the “Urim and Thummim.” Joseph found the interpreters buried in the hill with the plates. Those who saw the interpreters described them as a clear pair of stones bound together with a metal rim. The Book of Mormon referred to this instrument, together with its breastplate, as a device “kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord” and “handed down from generation to generation, for the purpose of interpreting languages.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, Eowyn said:

Why?

Because people question the authenticity of the BOA and the church had to release an essay on the subject. That's why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now