----- Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:42 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] How should we examine Mormonism?
David Miller wrote: >> For the record, I have never slandered Joe Smith. >> To slander means to say something false and >> damaging about somebody. I have NEVER said >> anything false about Joe Smith. I have only reported >> factual truths and desire to know how Mormons deal >> with the truth. If a Mormon or anybody here can show >> me anywhere that I said anything false about Joe Smith, >> I will send them $50. >> ... I have looked into this carefully and seriously, >> with the hopes of finding some good things. Blainer wrote: > Maybe you are just looking in all the wrong places??? > Have you read the History of the Church by BH > Roberts? You brought this reference up before, and so as I had mentioned to you before, I ordered this eight volume set. After it arrived, I discovered that Brigham Roberts was the editor, not the author. The work itself indicates that Joseph Smith is the author of all but the last volume. So this is primarily a history by Joseph Smith, not some disinterested third party as you seem to represent it. Yes, I have read much of it, but I do confess that because of its size, I have not yet read every word. One of the volumes is an index, so it helps me inquire about and read those areas where I would like to hear Joseph Smith's perspective. Blainer wrote: > I keep thinking when people read nothing but anti-Mormon > sites, they find views of people who have an ax to grind. > If I want to know something about Jews, do I look at > anti-semitic sites? No. I look at sites by Rabbis and others > whose integrity is not in question. The same with Mormons. Fair enough statement, but also bear in mind that it is equally important to hear what the critics are saying. I listen to critics of abortion and critics of anti-abortionists. I listen to critics of Christians and critics of anti-Christians. I listen to critics of Jews and to critics of anti-Semites. Don't you think it is helpful to listen to what the critics have to say? For the record, I read all pro-Mormon information that is of a scholastic nature. I also read some information that is critical of Mormonism. Do you read from both fountains of information, both that which is critical of the Mormon perspective AND that which is pro-Mormon? It seems to me that you only read pro-Mormon information. When I have brought up rather common objections, it is as if you never heard them before. Some points you simply deny without even considering them. Most statements and questions go completely ignored. I'm still waiting for the answer to the five questions I asked on October 7th. 1. Do you agree that the Bible prohibts polygamy by elders of the church? 2. Do you agree that Joseph Smith was an elder? 3. Do you agree that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy? 4. Do you agree that Joseph Smith lied about his polygamous life style? 5. Do you agree that Joseph Smith lied to his wife and children about his polygamous life style? Why do questions like these go unanswered while more recent posts are answered? I do not pose these questions to berate Joseph Smith or Mormonism. I sincerely desire to know how you reconcile this information. If I can't reconcile this information, and you can't reconcile this information, and if no Mormon can reconcile this information but simply ignores the facts, then Mormonism is an obvious sham. If you can reconcile the information, then that is another matter. I'm still waiting to hear your response. Blainer wrote: > I recommend inspired writings, that have a positive slant. > You can find something negative about anyone or anything, > if you look. Everyone of note has a few distractors. The point is not just to look for something "negative" but to consider the merit of critical comments. If I preach that the Bible is the Word of God to people who are skeptical of the Bible, I would do well to consider all the arguments available about why the Bible is not God's Word. If I have never considered their arguments, then the foundation for my belief is like sand. If I consider their arguments and their arguments have merit, then I will change my belief. If I consider their arguments and they do not have merit, then the foundation for my belief becomes like a rock, and I can better articulate why I believe what I believe. Blainer wrote: > JS has more than anyone I know, except > maybe JC. I don't buy this argument. Ideologically, Jesus Christ is fairly well accepted by name in our society. The detractors of Jesus Christ are certainly in the minority. As for Joseph Smith, most people are ignorant of him and someone like Adolf Hitler has many more detractors. Since you brought up Brigham Roberts as a pro-Mormon source that you approve of, I would like to ask you about some things he wrote before his death. This is taken from B.H. Roberts, "Studies of the Book of Mormon," edited by Brigham D. Madsen, published by University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1985. "If ... the view be taken that the Book of Mormon is merely of human origin; that a person of Joseph Smith's limitations in experience and in education, who was of the vicinage and of the period that produced the book -- if it be assumed that he is the author of it, then it could be said there is much internal evidence in the book itself to sustain such a view. In the first place there is a certain lack of perspective in the things the book relates as history that points quite clearly to an undeveloped mind as their origin. The narrative proceeds in characteristic disregard of conditions necessary to its reasonableness, as if it were a tale told by a child, with utter disregard for consistency." After giving many examples in the next 20 pages to prove his point, Roberts continues: " ... I shall hold that what is here presented illustrates sufficiently the matter taken in hand by referring to them, namely that they are all of one breed and brand; so nearly alike that one mind is the author of them, and that a young and undeveloped, but piously inclined mind. The evidence, I sorrowfully submit, points to Joseph Smith as their creator. It is difficult to believe that they are the products of history, that they come upon the scene separated by long periods of time, and among a race which was the ancestoral race of the red man of America." Since this is an author of which you apparently approve, would you comment upon his statements? Have you, like B.H. Roberts, considered the evidence that Joseph Smith was the creator of the Book of Mormon? Do you agree with Roberts that the internal evidence does point to the idea that Joseph Smith was the creator of the Book of Mormon? Or, do you rather approach this subject like Bill Clinton and deny, deny, deny: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." I will be watching to see how many of my questions above you answer and which ones you ignore. :-) Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
