Mormons and Frisbee

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Thank you for the employment offer, jB, but I must decline, see your founder and leader is a Mormon.

To each his own.....

Let's Fly Jets!!

 

[Super 80]

P.S. Don't believe everything you read on these message boards posted by people that have no idea what they're talking about.

The problem I have with Mormonism is the bibliography. Of all the writings that we count as Scripture, and even the books that are not included in the canon of the Bible, although were considered at one point or another and maybe even included for a while, this book has an origin completely different. I would welcome an independent assessment of the plates Joseph Smith found. However and evidently, they cannot be interpreted by normal means. I seriously question the fidelity of this book as coming from God, as well as doctrinal differences that separate Mormonism from mainstream Protestantism.

Plates Found with a Stone
A story told by early adherents was that a pair of spectacles was found with the plates for the purpose of translating. These spectacles were called interpreters in the Book of Mormon and later termed Urim and Thummim. The seer stone was also called a Urim and Thummim since the purpose was to translate languages.

Willard Chase said he talked with Joseph Smith in the fall of 1827 and that Smith "then observed that if it had not been for that stone, (which he acknowledged belonged to me,) he would not have obtained the book." (Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, 246); in EMD 2:71-72). This stone was the stone (he had more than one stone) through which Joseph Smith discover the ancient record engraved in Egyptian hieroglyphics on plates of gold. Among those who heard the story of finding the plates by the Chase stone were the following individuals:

Martin Harris, who became one for the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon. In 1859 he was interviewed and reported that Joseph told him that he found the gold plate by this tone. Harris said, "Joseph had a stone which was dug from the well of Mason Chase [brother of Willard Chase], twenty-four feet from the surface. In this stone he could see many things to my certain knowledge. It was by [the] means of this stone he first discovered these plates" (Tiffany's Monthly 5 [Aug. 1859]:163; in EMD 2:302). Later Harris explained, "Joseph had before this described the manner of his finding the plates. He found them by looking in the stone found in the well of Mason Chase. The [Smith] family had likewise told me the same thing" (Tiffany's Monthly 5 [Aug. 1859]:169; in EMD 2:309).

Henry Harris was another individual who spoke with Joseph Smith. Harris related that Joseph Smith, Jr. "said he had a revelation from God that told him they were hid in a certain hill and he looked in his stone and saw them in the place of deposit; that an angel appeared and told him he could not get the plates until he was married" (Affidavit of Henry Harris, no date [circa 1833], in Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, 252; in EMD 2:76).

 

[johnpeace]

the cult test

Some of the previous posts pretty much nailed it, Mogus' in particular.

Mormonism displays many of the hallmarks of a 'christian cult'. That's not a condemnation of Mormonism, God alone has that responsibility...it's just an observation. The Mormons deviate from Christian orthodoxy to the point of not being 'Christian' anymore.

Before you get all bent out of shape about me having the pompous audacity to say such a thing, you should understand what that means...

Some hallmarks of theologically cultish groups...
1. Is it reluctant to reveal all its doctrines on request?
2. Is it closed to inside/outside criticism?
3. Does it place curses on those who disagree?
4. Does it have practices or doctrines that are not found in the Bible?
5. Has it made prophecies that have not come to pass?
6. Have its doctrines changed a lot over the years?
7. Does it discourage or forbid its members to read other religious literature?
8. Does it claim divine authority to interpret the Bible for you?
9. Does it teach that the Bible can not be understood apart from its own literature?
10. Does it teach that its own traditions are of equal value with the Bible?
11. Does it tell you the Bible is dangerous to read for yourself?
12. Are any of its doctrines contradicted by the Bible?
13. Does it say that the Bible 'contains' the truth, but is not 'the whole truth?'
14. Does it teach that all other Christian groups are false?
15. Is dissent discouraged, penalized, or punished?
16. Do the call all dissent 'sin, pride, or rebellion?'
17. Are members required to sever all ties with the past, or with family or previous religious friends?
18. Does it have a totalitarian or dictatorial structure?
19. Are its members financially exploited?
20. Is fear a primary motivating factor in its teaching?
21. Does it teach that there is no salvation outside itself?
22. Does it say that the sacrifice of Christ was not sufficient, but that you must pay the price for your own sins?
23. Does it ask you to pay for its prayers for dead loved ones?
24. Does it profit from the sale and use of icons, a practice forbidden by the second commandment?
25. Does it teach that Jesus was one of many saviors, avatars, or gurus?
26. Does it teach that Jesus was just an angel, or some highly evolved human being?
27. Does it have hidden, secret knowledge or rituals available only to its members.
28. Does it offer something other than, or in addition to Jesus Christ as our Savior?
29. Is attendance at its rituals mandatory, with d@mnation being the price of your failure?
30. Does it make artificial distinctions between 'levels' of sin?
31. Does it teach that you must 'expiate' (pay the price for) your own sins, thus negating the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ?
32. Does it tell you to confess your sins to dead people in order to obtain forgiveness?
33. Does it promote worship, or veneration of the dead?
34. Does it claim its leader's pronouncements are perfect, irrevocable, and unchangeable?
35. Does it teach that sin can only be forgiven by its own representatives?
36. Are its moral teachings based on its own code of law instead of the Bible?
37. Does it keep you paying for years for the spiritual benefit of deceased loved ones?
38. Does it tell you to pray for, or get baptized for the dead?

I'm sure it's a great religion and I've known some really fine people who were Mormons. It's great to see such a comitted, morally upright group of people.

It just doesn't look like the Truth.

The Truth isn't afraid of criticism or questioning or of being called to account. The Truth doesn't change it's story to accomodate the times. The Truth doesn't make up it's own language that is kept secret from all but a select few.

Anyway, I hate to get involved with the stupid 'my religion could kick your religion's ass' arguments that are so popular on this forum...but it's frustrating to see how they go a lot of the time.

Discovering truth is not some vague, nebulous mystery that you can't really wrap your head around...we humans are logical, intelligent beings with an enormous capacity for reason and an innate desire to know and honor that which is true.

We were <gasp> created that way! God isn't beyond reason and logic, He's the author of reason and logic, the creator of reason and logic!

Doh...got suckered into it...sorry. I just think it's interesting some of the views I read here, views from both sides. Figured I'd weigh in with hopefully a reasonable, measured view.

 

[Super 80]

In the Bible it states that God is never changing. Therefore, why would he only have prophets on the earth at certain times? A prophet is not someone to replace God it is someone to be an example and to deliver God's will to his people. That seems pretty simple to understand to me.

One thing though, the test for a prophet is perfection. Prophets cannot be just mostly right.

Another aspect of prophets is the miraculous. God's signature on prophets is the miraculous. By miracles, God shows His stamp of authenticity. It is telling indeed to map out God's use of the miraculous, and it is tied for the most part to the formation of the Law with Moses, the prophets both major and minor, and with Jesus. This is God's stamp that these activities come from God.

Furthermore, God, while constant, does not constantly provide prophets. The time of the prophets was during Israel's state as a nation through the exile and into restoration and range for about 600 years from David's time around 1000 B.C. to the last group returning from exile with Malachi in 432 B.C. The prophetic prophets actually range slightly less with Elijah starting around 875 B.C. and the books of prophets having the oldest as Jonah around 785 B.C.

So just because God is constant, does not mean we need prophets to give us the Word of God. John says the Word became flesh with Jesus. So I don't know how you're going to improve upon that.

Joseph Smith certainly doesn't. In fact, his death belies the strict legalism his adherents live under if my source is correct. I was told he died in jail break designed to free him.

If you like, I'll get one of those tracts down at the Christian bookstore that talks about cults and go over some of the doctrinal differences between Mormonism and Christianity. While some of the words in the message are the same, how they are defined and applied vary significantly enough to matter a great deal.

 

[Typhoon1244]

I'm highly suspicious of anyone who says to me, "see that guy in the big chair...he knows best, just do what he says." That goes for Democrats as well as various religious hierarchies.

You mean like those Democrats who said, "the war on terror is to complicated for all of you to understand. Don't worry; we're taking care of it. And remember: it's un-American to ask questions." Like the President and Dick Cheney? Those Democrats?

 

[ATL2CDG]

Joseph Smith certainly doesn't. In fact, his death belies the strict legalism his adherents live under if my source is correct. I was told he died in jail break designed to free him.

First, show me where in the OT or NT (or the Book of Mormon for that matter) is says that prophets must be perfect? No LDS prophet has ever claimed to be perfect, either as a man or as a leader.

Second, Joseph Smith was kill my a mob of political and religious fanatics while he and three companions were illegally held by the county authorities in Illinois for duties rightly performed by Smith as mayor of Nauvoo. The then-governor of Illinois stated that J. Smith was right in his case but refused to send the state militia to enforce the law. Joseph was shot, ejected from a second story window by the mob and then shot again as he lay dying on the ground outside the jail in Carthage. He and his brother were killed by this mob without just cause; they and their two companions were peaceably awaiting a 'trial' and were made no attempts to escape.

Care to make more things up... ?

(and this defence is from a non-Mormon, mind you).

 

[Typhoon1244]

Joseph was shot, ejected from a second story window by the mob and then shot again as he lay dying on the ground outside the jail in Carthage.

[whistle] Didn't take any chances, did they?

(Reminds me of The Kentucky Fried Movie, when Dr. Klahn slices the agents head off, then commands, "now take him to be tortured!")

 

[Super 80]

I do remember reading some note left in a book of Mormon left in a hotel room. It referenced a page in the book that said one of the characters was going to prepare the horses for something. This is pretty interesting: to find horses in America 1500 years before they were introduced by the Spanish who brought them over on much larger sailing vessels.

Or the horses made the trip on the small vessels known to have existed two thousand years ago only to completely die out without a trace or even a picture drawn of what must have been a very strange creature to the Indians of North America. That is amazing for an animal that was very useful and quite capable of sustaining itself on its own should it escape as evidenced by the large mustang population that existed at one time in this nation.

Or it might have just been a slip of the tongue...

 

[ATL2CDG]

Super 80:

How about you actually quote something specific rather than playing the 'he said, she said, i read' game?

 

[Super 80]

Care to make more things up... ?

I caveated it by saying I was told. I was also told he was drinking and playing cards at the time too.

So it was his enemies that broke him out of jail. Hmmmmm.

 

[ATL2CDG]

I'm highly suspicious of anyone who says to me, "see that guy in the big chair...he knows best, just do what he says."

[sarcasm]

Actually, his name is Yahweh and it's called a 'throne'.

[/sarcasm]

I'm not just suspicious of him... I ignore him completely; it's safer that way.

 

[Super 80]

First, show me where in the OT or NT (or the Book of Mormon for that matter) is says that prophets must be perfect? No LDS prophet has ever claimed to be perfect, either as a man or as a leader.

Well here you go big guy. Right from the Expositor's Bible Commentary.

The role of the prophet in Israel. Moses is the prime OT prophet. He was called by God to lead Israel from Egypt and as God's spokesman to communicate the law that was to govern Israel's lifestyle. God warned Israel not to turn to the occult sources consulted by pagan nations (Dt 18:9-13). He promised to send his own spokesmen to Israel, spokesmen who would meet certain tests. Each prophet (1) would be an Israelite (Dt 18:15), (2) would speak in the name of the Lord (vv. 20-22), (3) would be authenticated by predictions that came true (v. 22), and (4) would deliver a message in harmony with written revelation (Dt 13:1-5). Anyone claiming to have a message from God but not meeting these tests was a false prophet and could be safely ignored (Dt 18:22).

 

[ATL2CDG]

Super 80:

I didn't see anything contradicting my point that prophets don't have to be perfect in your mindless ranting...

Try again...

 

[Super 80]

DT 18:21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Now about those horses...

 

[ATL2CDG]

Now about those horses...

Seriously... what is it with you and these horses? You are completely failing to make any point. You are randomly spouting quotes from this 'source' and hearsay from so-so, but you're not making ANY sense.

 

[Super 80]

ATL2CDG,

I read the passage in the book of Mormon. It clearly referenced horses. Supposedly, and I say so because no one can verify what is on the plates that Joseph Smith "found," the book of Mormon reveals that some people came over from Israel two thousand years ago with horses and acted just like they did with whole kingdoms and wars and such like the Israelites had in the Promised Land. All this and not one trace of their civilizations or any evidence for their existence unlike that of ancient Israel.

If you want to believe Joseph Smith could translate some plates with what are called hieroglyphics on it through a stone go right ahead. I don't know of any reliable source other than Joseph Smith that can make sense of it. If it truly is a style of writing, then it ought to be able to be interpreted by a reliable linguist. So far as I know, the plates cannot be read by anyone. I don’t even think they are accessible. I’ve been to the Temple grounds in Salt Lake City. If the plates were available to be viewed, it wasn’t posted anywhere on the property.

Furthermore, what I have read before on Mormonism suggests some fatal flaws in their doctrine that emanates from the book of Mormon when compared with Christianity and the Bible. Therefore, I do not think Joseph Smith was a proper prophet. He got it wrong. In addition, that means the book of Mormon, the stone and the plates did not come from God. It means the angel Moroni or how ever you spell it is a cruel hoax and eleven million adherents are being duped.

On a related fact, Salt Lake City is the capital of America's home brewing industry.

 

[ATL2CDG]

Re: the cult test

1. Is it reluctant to reveal all its doctrines on request? Yes.
2. Is it closed to inside/outside criticism? No.
3. Does it place curses on those who disagree? No.
4. Does it have practices or doctrines that are not found in the Bible? Yes.
5. Has it made prophecies that have not come to pass? Yes.
6. Have its doctrines changed a lot over the years? No.
7. Does it discourage or forbid its members to read other religious literature? No.
8. Does it claim divine authority to interpret the Bible for you? No.
9. Does it teach that the Bible can not be understood apart from its own literature? No.
10. Does it teach that its own traditions are of equal value with the Bible? No.
11. Does it tell you the Bible is dangerous to read for yourself? No.
12. Are any of its doctrines contradicted by the Bible? No.
13. Does it say that the Bible 'contains' the truth, but is not 'the whole truth?' Yes.
14. Does it teach that all other Christian groups are false? Yes.
15. Is dissent discouraged, penalized, or punished? No.
16. Do the call all dissent 'sin, pride, or rebellion?' No.
17. Are members required to sever all ties with the past, or with family or previous religious friends? No.
18. Does it have a totalitarian or dictatorial structure? No.
19. Are its members financially exploited? No.
20. Is fear a primary motivating factor in its teaching? No.
21. Does it teach that there is no salvation outside itself? No.
22. Does it say that the sacrifice of Christ was not sufficient, but that you must pay the price for your own sins? No.
23. Does it ask you to pay for its prayers for dead loved ones? (what the???) No.
24. Does it profit from the sale and use of icons, a practice forbidden by the second commandment? No.
25. Does it teach that Jesus was one of many saviors, avatars, or gurus? No.
26. Does it teach that Jesus was just an angel, or some highly evolved human being? No.
27. Does it have hidden, secret knowledge or rituals available only to its members. Yes.
28. Does it offer something other than, or in addition to Jesus Christ as our Savior? No.
29. Is attendance at its rituals mandatory, with d@mnation being the price of your failure? No.
30. Does it make artificial distinctions between 'levels' of sin? No.
31. Does it teach that you must 'expiate' (pay the price for) your own sins, thus negating the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ? Somewhat.
32. Does it tell you to confess your sins to dead people in order to obtain forgiveness? No.
33. Does it promote worship, or veneration of the dead? No.
34. Does it claim its leader's pronouncements are perfect, irrevocable, and unchangeable? No.
35. Does it teach that sin can only be forgiven by its own representatives? Yes.
36. Are its moral teachings based on its own code of law instead of the Bible? No.
37. Does it keep you paying for years for the spiritual benefit of deceased loved ones? No.
38. Does it tell you to pray for, or get baptized for the dead? Yes.

 

[johnpeace]

Super80

I didn't quite get the point either...

Was it that there are references to horses in the BOM and that such would indicate that it's fraudulent?

I'm not that familiar with the history of the mormon writings, but a search on Google (gotta love Google) reveals:

http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/m/morm...mat=Long&q1=horse&restrict=All&size=First+100

 

[ATL2CDG]

ATL2CDG,

I read the passage in the book of Mormon. It clearly referenced horses. Supposedly, and I say so because no one can verify what is on the plates that Joseph Smith "found," the book of Mormon reveals that some people came over from Israel two thousand years ago with horses and acted just like they did with whole kingdoms and wars and such like the Israelites had in the Promised Land. All this and not one trace of their civilizations or any evidence for their existence unlike that of ancient Israel.

If you want to believe Joseph Smith could translate some plates with what are called hieroglyphics on it, through a stone go right ahead. I don't know of any reliable source other than Joseph Smith that can make sense of it. If it truly is a style of writing, then it ought to be able to be interpreted by a reliable linguist. So far as I know, the plates cannot be read by anyone. I don’t even think they are accessible. I’ve been to the Temple grounds in Salt Lake City. If the plates were available to be viewed, it wasn’t posted anywhere on the property.

Furthermore, what I have read before on Mormonism suggests some fatal flaws in their doctrine that emanates from the book of Mormon when compared with Christianity and the Bible. Therefore, I do not think Joseph Smith was a proper prophet. He got it wrong. In addition, that means the book of Mormon, the stone and the plates did not come from God. It means the angel Moroni or how ever you spell it is a cruel hoax and eleven million adherents are being duped.

On a related fact, Salt Lake City is the capital of America's home brewing industry.

You find that passage in question and I'll be more than happy to discuss it. If you can't quote specifics, then I don't feel it can be included in the argument.

Various persons other than Joseph Smith saw and handled the plates. Even those witnesses who left the Church (for whatever reasons) at in time NEVER contradicted the existence of the plates. And yes, you can't see the plates. The prophet can't see the plates. Once Joseph completed the translation, the LDS church states they were taken to heaven by Moroni. Something noteworthy for those interested: many non-church scholars have studied the Book of Mormon and most state that there are various styles of writing (meaning different authors) for the various books within. They state that no one could fake these literary differences.

And on your third paragraph, rather than reading third-party literature about the church, why don't you read its texts and publications. Talk with a bishop or ward mission leader. Rather than listening to those who claim to know all about the evil Mormons, why don't you study the evil Mormons directly. Also, given that you don't even know the details of his life or dead (as evidenced above), I doubt you stand qualified to judge Smith a 'proper prophet' or not.

Lastly... SLC the brewing capital? Uhm, okay. LDS compose only about 35-40% of the SLC proper population and certainly don't control local government and commerce (like one can find in Southern Baptist-dominated dry counties throughout the South). How in the world is this at all 'related' to the discussion at hand??

 

[Super 80]

I didn't quite get the point either...

Was it that there are references to horses in the BOM and that such would indicate that it's fraudulent?

The horse is not native to America. The book of Mormon as written by Joseph Smith includes this glaring inaccuracy.

You have to love the access the internet provides and especially the ease of Google searches.

I stand corrected that the horse was brought over, I only read one reference about horses being prepared possibly for a chariot which in itself is a hoot. The passage in Alma 18 sounds like what I remember.

I'd love to see the archaeological digs for these kingdoms. I'm sure there's plenty of artifacts to show how their agriculture was in place rather than the Native American Indian's style of agriculture.

It's also rewarding to see how this ancient civilization influenced Native Indian cultures.

What I'm saying is the book of Mormon is a bunch of hooey.

 

[ATL2CDG]

What I'm saying is the book of Mormon is a bunch of hooey.

I'd like to reiterate my position that given you know basically NOTHING about the LDS church beyond hearsay and half-truths, I feel you're the LAST person on this message board to make such a mature, rash and in-depth assessment.

 

[Super 80]

You know, I've studied God's Word for a long time, and I don't know anything about the book of Mormon. I've even watched Mormon shows detailing the various lessons in the history of the book of Mormon. But I have yet to see the need to actually read it. I guess after the Bible, I don't need anything else, especially something as patently foolish as the book of Mormon. If I want to use my time efficiently, I'll let some other Christian scholar do it for me. There are enough of them that have thoroughly debunked Mormon doctrine based on its conflict with Biblical Scripture that I do not have to study from those duped in order to refute it.

You find that passage in question and I'll be more than happy to discuss it.

[ALMA 18:9] And they said unto him: Behold, he is feeding thy horses. Now the king had commanded his servants, previous to the time of the watering of their flocks, that they should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth to the land of Nephi; for there had been a great feast appointed at the land of Nephi, by the father of Lamoni, who was king over all the land.

This is the passage I remember.

Once Joseph completed the translation, the LDS church states they were taken to heaven by Moroni.

HOW CONVIENENT!

I doubt you stand qualified to judge Smith a 'proper prophet' or not.

Oh I think I can throw out his "book" quite easily and with authority. When you contradict the Bible, you are talking about heresy.

 

[ATL2CDG]

When you contradict the Bible, you are talking about heresy.

Please provide me with a direct quote or quotes from the Book of Mormon showing a direct and unrefutable contradiction of the Old or New Testaments of the Christian bible.

 

[Super 80]

Please provide me with a direct quote or quotes from the Book of Mormon showing a direct and unrefutable contradiction of the Old or New Testaments of the Christian bible.

Sorry, the Christian Book Store is closed right now.

Besides, what about those horses? Care to explain that?

Could you tell me what land mass the Kingdoms in America that the book of Mormon describes covers?

How did these ancient people interact with the native Indians?

Just how many kingdoms were there and how large were they?

Good thing they had all those horses too. Care to explain how this Moroni angel and Joseph Smith are the only ones that know horses were in North America before the Spanish brought them in?

You said you'd explain that verse in Alma if I found it. I have. Now explain it.

 

[johnpeace]

Please provide me with a direct quote or quotes from the Book of Mormon showing a direct and unrefutable contradiction of the Old or New Testaments of the Christian bible.

Here's one:
"And Behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God" — Alma 7:10.

The Bible (the gospels and OT prophecies telling of the Messiah's coming) identify Jesus as being born in Bethlehem.

And our friends at Apologetics Index (great site!) have compiled a list of some other points where the Bible and the LDS church don't see eye to eye.

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/m04d.html

 

[ATL2CDG]

I stand corrected that the horse was brought over, I only read one reference about horses being prepared possibly for a chariot which in itself is a hoot. The passage in Alma 18 sounds like what I remember.

By you're own admission, you were wrong, so I have nothing to explain; your argument was wrong.

Furthermore, the LDS Church contends that the 'Native Americans' were the descendants of those people in the Book for Mormon. The precise details, I know not. However, the church makes very good points - if you're openminded enough to read their literature.

 

[ATL2CDG]

Here's one:
"And Behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God" — Alma 7:10.

The Bible (the gospels and OT prophecies telling of the Messiah's coming) identify Jesus as being born in Bethlehem.

And our friends at Apologetics Index (great site!) have compiled a list of some other points where the Bible and the LDS church don't see eye to eye.

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/m04d.html

Regarding 'Jerusalem', I was able to draw this from Joseph Fielding McConkies' Jesus Christ: the Fundamental Verity:

"At Jerusalem" These words have spawned a host of heckles and sneers directed at the Book of Mormon. Persons of a skeptical and cynical spirit ask: "Didn't Joseph Smith know that Jesus was born of Mary in Bethlehem?" We answer: Yes, he was born in Bethlehem, but he was also born at Jerusalem, meaning that Bethlehem, the smaller community, was within the environs of Jerusalem, the larger city. In our day it would be as if someone froth Sandy or even Provo, Utah, had said to one somewhat unfamiliar with the Wasatch Front, "I am from Salt Lake City."

 

[Super 80]

No no no! Now your stink is starting to clump!

Just because I was assuming the horses mentioned came over does not refute the fact that the book of Mormon said there WERE horses here before the Spanish brought them over!

Futhermore, Indians were in America long before 1500 B.C. And if that were not enough, if you are going to say the Indian nations that are as diverse as this land with all the varied ethnic groups that are Asiatic in origin are now Semitic, that is a another new one that qualifies as a whopper of a tale.

In fact this whole farcas is getting stranger and stanger!

And JohnPeace comes up with a direct factual contradiction!

What do you say now ATL2CDG or are you going to slink off?

 

[Super 80]

In our day it would be as if someone froth Sandy or even Provo, Utah, had said to one somewhat unfamiliar with the Wasatch Front, "I am from Salt Lake City."

Sorry, the Hebrews were VERY specific when it came to where they were from. Bethlehem is not a suburb of Jerusalem. In fact it is more than a few miles from there in a time when the average person walked.

 

[414Flyer]

yeah its pretty well established scientifically, both genetically and anthropologically, that the "Indians" are Asian in origin, and not Israeli/Hebrew.

You wont find anyone outside the LDS church that believes that in the isreali/indian story. However in the 1830s around Joe Smiths time, there were those that believed it. It wasnt an uncommon belief then.