God complex, and belief Joseph Smith is a God.

[Markk]

Tried, but his is all I got...

Early Mormon Documents: Volume 5 : Dan Vogel​

https://archive.org › details › volume-5_202011


Nov 9, 2020 — In Volume Five: INTERVIEWS WITH BOOK OF MORMON WITNESS DAVID WHITMER, CONDUCTED BY: Joseph F. Smith & Orson Pratt William H. Kelley & George ...
Missing: [URL ‎unfurl= ‎39/ ‎1up ‎URL]

Go here... https://www.google.com/search?q=fair+lds&sxsrf=AJOqlzUPvbxWnBeFjE2UzLsGcMouLbWUUQ:1677464325413&source=hp&ei=BRP8Y-_fF4HFkPIP-NGV-AY&iflsig=AK50M_UAAAAAY_whFbA6otVuWb_jJPvjxaM4Co6iZyy4&oq=Fair&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECCMQJzIECCMQJzIECCMQJzIICC4Q1AIQkQIyBQguEJECMggILhDUAhCRAjIRCC4QgAQQsQMQgwEQxwEQrwEyCwgAEIAEELEDEIMBMgUIABCABDILCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6BQgAEJECOhEILhCABBCxAxCDARDHARDRAzoICAAQsQMQgwE6CAgAEIAEELEDOg4ILhCABBCxAxCDARDUAlAAWO0IYLQfaABwAHgAgAFhiAG6ApIBATSYAQCgAQE&sclient=gws-wiz

click where it says search, then type in Dan Vogel...10 pages will come up.

 

[Richard7]

Go here... https://www.google.com/search?q=fair+lds&sxsrf=AJOqlzUPvbxWnBeFjE2UzLsGcMouLbWUUQ:1677464325413&source=hp&ei=BRP8Y-_fF4HFkPIP-NGV-AY&iflsig=AK50M_UAAAAAY_whFbA6otVuWb_jJPvjxaM4Co6iZyy4&oq=Fair&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECCMQJzIECCMQJzIECCMQJzIICC4Q1AIQkQIyBQguEJECMggILhDUAhCRAjIRCC4QgAQQsQMQgwEQxwEQrwEyCwgAEIAEELEDEIMBMgUIABCABDILCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6BQgAEJECOhEILhCABBCxAxCDARDHARDRAzoICAAQsQMQgwE6CAgAEIAEELEDOg4ILhCABBCxAxCDARDUAlAAWO0IYLQfaABwAHgAgAFhiAG6ApIBATSYAQCgAQE&sclient=gws-wiz

click where it says search, then type in Dan Vogel...10 pages will come up.

Nope, no Dan Vogel there, do you actually know how to source something? You're apparently not gifted at it.

 

[Richard7]

Were...give me the quote.

I have several times Markk.... Joseph Smith Foundation and all you have to do is go back to my many post where I gave it to you already.
I'm not you teacher good buddy, I use sources which you find hard to do...

LOL...no Paulson has a less than credible source, even Richard L. Anderson concedes that.

Here is the transcript in context:

When you pat yourself on the back for reading the book in four months, just remember, the Prophet translated it in less time than that. So don't be too proud of yourself. Quite miraculous, really, through the gift and power of God. We have a lot of suggestions about how it was done. We know that they had a table like this. We know they had the golden plates, covered usually. And Joseph used these: the Urim and Thummim, seer stones, in the hat. And it was easier for him to see the light when he'd take that position.

That is not completely what he said Markk, your fudging and totally misrepresenting Pres. Nelson.... I would ask everyone to check out the video for the truth which you have left out...

To me, it's like having my mobile phone in my hand. And I can get messages on it that you can't see. That's true. And they had nothing like that. So it's just the gift and power of God, how he was able to do that in that period of time.

True, gift and power of God and God did not leave a seer stone in the buried box where the seer stones and spectacles were found and the witnesses never where show the seer stone when the testified of the gold plates... nice try.

There is no doubt here...none at all, the Book of Mormon was translated by seer stones. The interpreter and the single stone...

They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters.

Yep and here is the authors you sources from...ames R. B. Vancleave, letter to Joseph Smith III in Lyndon W. Cook, ed., David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness (Orem, Utah: Grandin Book, 1991), 239–40.

No exactly first hand witness, right Markk?

The Book of Mormon Is Tangible Evidence of the Restoration

President Russell M. Nelson and Jean B. Bingham, Relief Society General President, discuss the translation of the Book of Mormon at the site in Pennsylvania where Joseph Smith translated it.

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Seer Stones

Seer Stones

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Nope, your relying on David Whitmere and others who never saw him personally using the seer stone including Emma Smith. David has been shown to have had a bad memory and contradicts himself over and over.

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions - An Analysis of Statements by David Whitmer on Translation of the Book of Mormon​

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the
josephsmithfoundation.org


And

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions – An Analysis of Statements

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate. Joseph and Emma were married on January 18...

josephsmithfoundation.org

 

[Richard7]

Ralf did you read and follow the notes? You said you don't read or research, so I am under the assumption you did not in regard to Pearsons's article.

This is the first assertion, of Pearson, whom I still can't find anything on, in regard to LDS apologetics history.

"In one of the first published interviews (Aug 16, 1878)6, David provides a traditional description of the Urim and Thummim where he says there “were two white stones, each of them cased in as spectacles are, in a kind of silver casing, but the bow between the stones was more heavy, and longer apart between the stones, than we usually find it in spectacles.” "

If you followed the foot notes, you would know that not much is known about Dr Paulson. Also, David later in a letter to a "S.T. Mouch, he complained about the interview that he did not make the statement he said I made. We don't have the letter of inquire to DW, just the letter in response...so we don't know what part of the interview David was complaining about.

Yes we do Markk, you are not reading the source I gave you and who is S.T. Mouch, you seem to be mixing up the stories so here it is again for you...

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions – An Analysis of Statements

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate. Joseph and Emma were married on January 18...

josephsmithfoundation.org

The seer stone in the hat became a narrative, albeit an inconsistent narrative, in many of the interviews conducted with David Whitmer. David went so far as to require Thomas Wood Smith (Jan 1, 1880)11 to retract the statement he printed on Mar 28, 1879 (see footnote 7) to which the disconcerted Thomas stated that, “Unless my interview with David Whitmer in January, 1876, was only a dream, or that I failed to understand plain English, I believed then, and since, and now, that he said that Joseph possessed, and used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the inscriptions referred to, and I remember being much pleased with that statement…” Referring, again, to David Whitmer as “Father Whitmer”, Thomas goes on to say “…that unless I altogether misunderstood ‘Father Whitmer’ on this point, he said the translation was done by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. If he says he did not intend to convey such an impression to my mind, then I say I regret that I misunderstood him, and unintentionally have misrepresented him. But that I understood him as represented by me frequently I still affirm. If Father Whitmer will say over his own signature, that he never said, or at least never intended to say, that Joseph possessed or used in translating the Book of Mormon, the Urim and Thummim, I will agree to not repeat my testimony as seen in the Fall River Herald on that point.”


David’s accounts, the term “interpreters” is generally synonymous with the Urim and Thummim which is usually described as having two stones. In this account, David calls the stone that he describes as being a “small oval kidney-shaped stone” and calls it Urim and Thummim. On the other hand, he described the Urim and Thummim as having “two white stones,” (see footnote 7) “two small stones of chocolate color,” (see footnote 9) and “two transparent pebbles,”15in different interviews. In one interview alone, David talks about “stone spectacles,” “the Urim and Thummim,” “the magic stone”, and a “strange oval-shaped chocolate-colored stone.”16 The inconsistencies in David Whitmer’s descriptions of the object used by Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon should be sufficiently alarming to cause one to wonder about the credibility of any of David’s testimonials about the translation of the Book of Mormon.

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions – An Analysis of Statements

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate. Joseph and Emma were married on January 18...

josephsmithfoundation.org

But if we just take it as being all true...it confirms that the U&T were two stones in a spectacle...and as I have shown many times elder Nelson said this would be put into Joseph hat.

Right two stones and I'm not debating the hat.... I for one don't have much merit in that...

Ralf you always complain about 2nd, or more hand testimonies, yet this is a third hand interview. Paulson even say at the end of the interview, it was "mostly" word for word. It was printed 4 months after the interview.

What is your source Markk, or is this another opinion?
What is your point, it could have been a day, a week or a yr..... I don't understand your issue. Why is this a third hand interview if he claims it at the end of the interview....

Also note the newspaper editor writes that Whitmer, is "well preserved man."

There is more to read on this one-foot note...you can start here if you are interested in understanding what the truth is.

Early Mormon Documents: Volume 5 : Dan Vogel : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

In Volume Five: INTERVIEWS WITH BOOK OF MORMON WITNESS DAVID WHITMER, CONDUCTED BY: Joseph F. Smith & Orson Pratt William H. Kelley & George A. Blakeslee...

archive.org

Your URL's never take me anywhere Markk... there is nothing there, can't you just copy and paste the search site like I do.

 

[Markk]

I have several times Markk.... Joseph Smith Foundation and all you have to do is go back to my many post where I gave it to you already.
I'm not you teacher good buddy, I use sources which you find hard to do...

LOL...okay,

That is not completely what he said Markk, your fudging and totally misrepresenting Pres. Nelson.... I would ask everyone to check out the video for the truth which you have left out...

Here is the transcript once more...BTW, transcript is basically a Carbon copy of what he said. If anyone wants to read the transcript or watche the video...the link is below, with the part we are discussing in bold print, from the transcript. Elder nelson says "he used" the seer stone in the hat.

"We sometimes take for granted the fact that it's not a pen like we carry in our pockets or purse. It's ink and a turkey feather. Well, they started on April 7, 1829. They lost--Joseph and Emma had lost the previous translation, which is another story. And they worked assiduously while being hounded by mobs, even some adversarial relationships with members of the family, until they were done. They had to move from Pennsylvania back to New York to finish the work. Meanwhile, they had to file for a copyright, and the restoration of the priesthood came, and 15 revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants had to be recorded. About 60, 65 working days, they got that job done. They translated. So the book was done on June 30 of that year, translating at about the rate of six to eight manuscript pages per day. Have you ever been to circumstances nowadays where the bishop or elders quorum president or someone challenges to read the Book of Mormon in four months? Mm-hmm. Well, in our own ward, we've had that same kind of--we were in the same ward for a while. When you pat yourself on the back for reading the book in four months, just remember, the Prophet translated it in less time than that. So don't be too proud of yourself. Quite miraculous, really, through the gift and power of God. We have a lot of suggestions about how it was done. We know that they had a table like this. We know they had the golden plates, covered usually. And Joseph used these: the Urim and Thummim, seer stones, in the hat. And it was easier for him to see the light when he'd take that position."

The Book of Mormon Is Tangible Evidence of the Restoration

President Russell M. Nelson and Jean B. Bingham, Relief Society General President, discuss the translation of the Book of Mormon at the site in Pennsylvania where Joseph Smith translated it.

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

True, gift and power of God and God did not leave a seer stone in the buried box where the seer stones and spectacles were found, and the witnesses never where show the seer stone when the testified of the gold plates... nice try.

That makes no sense, or does it follow the history, and disagrees with the church, FAIR, and other LDS sources...including the prophet. It disagrees with Emma, David Whitmer, Martin Harris, Olivers wife, John Whitmer and many others on how the BoM was translated.

Yep and here is the authors you sources from...ames R. B. Vancleave, letter to Joseph Smith III in Lyndon W. Cook, ed., David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness (Orem, Utah: Grandin Book, 1991), 239–40.

No exactly first hand witness, right Markk?

Ralf...the church conceded that Urim and Thummim was a term for the seer stone, I have given it to you fron LDS .org maybe a dozen times...here it is once more...:

“interpreters.” During the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently used both of these instruments—the interpreters and his seer stone—interchangeably. They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters.

Seer Stones

Seer Stones

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Nope, your relying on David Whitmere and others who never saw him personally using the seer stone including Emma Smith. David has been shown to have had a bad memory and contradicts himself over and over.

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions - An Analysis of Statements by David Whitmer on Translation of the Book of Mormon​

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the
josephsmithfoundation.org


And

David Whitmer: Man of Contradictions - An Analysis of Statements by David Whitmer on Translation of the Book of Mormon​

L.H. Pearson, Ph.D. Introduction After four years from the first meeting with Moroni on the Hill Cumorah, on 22 September 1827, Moroni gave Joseph Smith the sacred record written upon metal plates along with the
josephsmithfoundation.org

NO Ralf...Emma was a scribe and the closest person with Joseph. They slept in the same bed in the Whitmer home and lived the room that the BoM was translated. David Whitmer is the most interviewed witness and the most consistent. Martin Harris complimented this as did Olivers wife and resident of the Whitmer home when the BoM was translated.

If you believe David Whitmer contradicted himself on this...be specific, don't just past a link from a unknow critic of the BoM witnesses.

 

[Richard7]

LOL...okay,


Here is the transcript once more...BTW, transcript is basically a Carbon copy of what he said. If anyone wants to read the transcript or watche the video...the link is below, with the part we are discussing in bold print, from the transcript. Elder nelson says "he used" the seer stone in the hat.

"We sometimes take for granted the fact that it's not a pen like we carry in our pockets or purse. It's ink and a turkey feather. Well, they started on April 7, 1829. They lost--Joseph and Emma had lost the previous translation, which is another story. And they worked assiduously while being hounded by mobs, even some adversarial relationships with members of the family, until they were done. They had to move from Pennsylvania back to New York to finish the work. Meanwhile, they had to file for a copyright, and the restoration of the priesthood came, and 15 revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants had to be recorded. About 60, 65 working days, they got that job done. They translated. So the book was done on June 30 of that year, translating at about the rate of six to eight manuscript pages per day. Have you ever been to circumstances nowadays where the bishop or elders quorum president or someone challenges to read the Book of Mormon in four months? Mm-hmm. Well, in our own ward, we've had that same kind of--we were in the same ward for a while. When you pat yourself on the back for reading the book in four months, just remember, the Prophet translated it in less time than that. So don't be too proud of yourself. Quite miraculous, really, through the gift and power of God We have a lot of suggestions about how it was done.

Here is the wrench you have not even began to figure out.....
1). We have a lot of suggestions about how it was done.
2). used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters.
3). Stones Markk, stones not a seer stone. Whoops again.

That makes no sense, or does it follow the history, and disagrees with the church, FAIR, and other LDS sources...including the prophet. It disagrees with Emma, David Whitmer, Martin Harris, Olivers wife, John Whitmer and many others on how the BoM was translated.

Oliver wife? really, are you that desperate. John Whitmer, please so tell us what John Whitmer stated or gave in any interview... please source it, please source his statement.

Ralf...the church conceded that Urim and Thummim was a term for the seer stone, I have given it to you fron LDS .org maybe a dozen times...here it is once more...:

“interpreters.” During the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently used both of these instruments—the interpreters and his seer stone—interchangeably. They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters.

Seer Stones

Seer Stones

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

And again here are your researchers! James R. B. Vancleave, letter to Joseph Smith III in Lyndon W. Cook, ed., David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness (Orem, Utah: Grandin Book, 1991), 239–40.

Not one of them was a witness to the means of interpretation.

NO Ralf...Emma was a scribe and the closest person with Joseph. They slept in the same bed in the Whitmer home and lived the room that the BoM was translated. David Whitmer is the most interviewed witness and the most consistent. Martin Harris complimented this as did Olivers wife and resident of the Whitmer home when the BoM was translated.

Again please, a source that JS and Emma slept up in the attic? When you say Whitmere, David was the most consistence then I know you did not go to the site I already gave you that listed 24 interviews with David and shows his inconsistency and contradictions. He is a terrible witness for reason I can only speculate.... these interview were much later in his life and a very forgetful memory... also he was not a witness to the actual means of translating

If you believe David Whitmer contradicted himself on this...be specific, don't just past a link from a unknow critic of the BoM witnesses.

I'm not going to post it again Markk, you're playing coy and literally deflecting.... the site I gave you over and over has 24 interviews with David Whitmere...

 

[Markk]

Yes we do Markk, you are not reading the source I gave you and who is S.T. Mouch, you seem to be mixing up the stories so here it is again for you...

S.T Mouch is the person David wrote a letter to. I have no idea who he is, but what we know is what the BoM Witness said to him in a letter. We don't have correspondence or conversation from Mouch to David, only his letter to him.

The seer stone in the hat became a narrative, albeit an inconsistent narrative, in many of the interviews conducted with David Whitmer. David went so far as to require Thomas Wood Smith (Jan 1, 1880)11 to retract the statement he printed on Mar 28, 1879 (see footnote 7) to which the disconcerted Thomas stated that, “Unless my interview with David Whitmer in January, 1876, was only a dream, or that I failed to understand plain English, I believed then, and since, and now, that he said that Joseph possessed, and used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the inscriptions referred to, and I remember being much pleased with that statement…” Referring, again, to David Whitmer as “Father Whitmer”, Thomas goes on to say “…that unless I altogether misunderstood ‘Father Whitmer’ on this point, he said the translation was done by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. If he says he did not intend to convey such an impression to my mind, then I say I regret that I misunderstood him, and unintentionally have misrepresented him. But that I understood him as represented by me frequently I still affirm. If Father Whitmer will say over his own signature, that he never said, or at least never intended to say, that Joseph possessed or used in translating the Book of Mormon, the Urim and Thummim, I will agree to not repeat my testimony as seen in the Fall River Herald on that point.”

Your paste above is edited to change the context. Here is the quote in full, I put in bold the words he conveniently and purposely left out.

The article you pasted, in context.


[2. Thomas W. Smith Response, 1880]
Bro. Joseph:—When I first read Mr. Traughber’s paper in [the] Herald of November 15th, 4 1 thought that I would not notice his attack at all, as I sup¬ posed that I was believed by the Church to be fair and truthful in my state¬ ments of other men’s views, when I have occasion to use them, and I shall make this reply only: That unless my interview with David Whitmer in Jan¬ uary, 1876, was only a dream, or that I failed to understand plain English, I believed then, and since, and now, that he said that Joseph possessed, and used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the inscriptions referred to, and I remember of being much pleased with that statement, as I had heard of the “Seer stone” being used. And unless I dreamed the interview, or very soon after failed to recollect the occasion, he described the form and size of the said Urim and Thummim. The nearest approach to a retraction of my testimony as given in the Fall River Herald and that given publicly in many places from the stand from January, 1876, till now, is, that unless I altogether misunderstood “Father Whitmer” on this point, he said the translation was done by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. If he says he did not intend to convey such an impression to my mind, then I say I regret that I misunder¬ stood him, and unintentionally have misrepresented him. But that I under¬ stood him as represented by me frequently I still affirm. If Father Whitmer will say over his own signature, that he never said, or at least never intended to say, that Joseph possessed or used in translating the Book of Mormon, the Urim and Thummim, I will agree to not repeat my testimony as seen in the Fall River Herald on that point.

Ralf,

Once again read this...

"This instrument was referred to in the Book of Mormon as the “interpreters.” During the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently used both of these instruments—the interpreters and his seer stone—interchangeably. They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters."

Seer Stones

Seer Stones

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Now go back are read Pearsons assertion, he does not understand that there is no such thing as a separate Urim and Thummim in regard to the BoM, in that it meant either the single seer stone or the interpreters. His assertion is that they are all seperate devices.

What is your position, I keep asking yet so far you haven't said what it is yet...although you said he did use the hat.

 

[Richard7]

S.T Mouch is the person David wrote a letter to. I have no idea who he is, but what we know is what the BoM Witness said to him in a letter. We don't have correspondence or conversation from Mouch to David, only his letter to him.

So you copied a source and you don't even know who he is, are you kidding me. Most researches would just laugh at that, embarrassing my friend. Do you have a date or anything about the note?

Your paste above is edited to change the context. Here is the quote in full, I put in bold the words he conveniently and purposely left out.

The article you pasted, in context.


[2. Thomas W. Smith Response, 1880]
Bro. Joseph:—When I first read Mr. Traughber’s paper in [the] Herald of November 15th, 4 1 thought that I would not notice his attack at all, as I sup¬ posed that I was believed by the Church to be fair and truthful in my state¬ ments of other men’s views, when I have occasion to use them, and I shall make this reply only: That unless my interview with David Whitmer in Jan¬ uary, 1876, was only a dream, or that I failed to understand plain English, I believed then, and since, and now, that he said that Joseph possessed, and used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the inscriptions referred to, and I remember of being much pleased with that statement, as I had heard of the “Seer stone” being used. And unless I dreamed the interview, or very soon after failed to recollect the occasion, he described the form and size of the said Urim and Thummim. The nearest approach to a retraction of my testimony as given in the Fall River Herald and that given publicly in many places from the stand from January, 1876, till now, is, that unless I altogether misunderstood “Father Whitmer” on this point, he said the translation was done by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. If he says he did not intend to convey such an impression to my mind, then I say I regret that I misunder¬ stood him, and unintentionally have misrepresented him. But that I under¬ stood him as represented by me frequently I still affirm. If Father Whitmer will say over his own signature, that he never said, or at least never intended to say, that Joseph possessed or used in translating the Book of Mormon, the Urim and Thummim, I will agree to not repeat my testimony as seen in the Fall River Herald on that point.

Do understand past tense as in: "as I had heard of the “Seer stone” being used."
So what did he belived he had heard from David?

I believed then, and since, and now, that he said that Joseph possessed, and used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the inscriptions referred to, and I remember of being much pleased with that statement

What did he believe he had heard and now would change only if David would sign for the change?

If Father Whitmer will say over his own signature, that he never said, or at least never intended to say, that Joseph possessed or used in translating the Book of Mormon, the Urim and Thummim, I will agree to not repeat my testimony as seen in the Fall River Herald on that point.

You just dug yourself a huge pit Markk... you don't even understand plain english...

Once again read this...

"This instrument was referred to in the Book of Mormon as the “interpreters.” During the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently used both of these instruments—the interpreters and his seer stone—interchangeably. They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters."

Seer Stones

Seer Stones

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Again Markk, what does "apparently" (seemingly) project to you... would you use such a word if you new for a fact someones statement used "apparently" as proof this was a legitimate fact or claim...

Now go back are read Pearsons assertion, he does not understand that there is no such thing as a separate Urim and Thummim in regard to the BoM, in that it meant either the single seer stone or the interpreters. His assertion is that they are all seperate devices.

Well yes, apparently so! chuckle.

Apparently: seemingly, evidently, it seems (that), it appears (that), it would seem (that), it would appear (that), as far as one knows, by all accounts; ostensibly, outwardly, supposedly, on the face of it, so the story goes, so I'm told; allegedly, reputedly.

What is your position, I keep asking yet so far you haven't said what it is yet...although you said he did use the hat.

Again, using JS as a first hand account and Oliver Cowdery, neither of them ever stated a seer stone, just the use of the Urim and Thummim. You never answered why the 3 witness ever claimed a seer stone was shown them when they did say they saw the Sword of Laban, Urim and Thummim, Gold Plates and the Compass, all of these were found in the cement box that Moroni buried them in.

 

[Markk]

So you copied a source and you don't even know who he is, are you kidding me. Most researches would just laugh at that, embarrassing my friend. Do you have a date or anything about the note?

No, I CF'da letter by David Witmer to a person, the context is what David wrote. Please show me the searchers that would laugh at that. It would like be like saying Paul's Epistles are invalid because ewe don't know specifically who they were sent to. Whe you quote FAIR, do you know who authors the assertions.

Again you have no idea what the argument even is, which is what David Whitmer wrote and thought.

Do understand past tense as in: "as I had heard of the “Seer stone” being used."
So what did he belived he had heard from David?

LOL...huh, the point is that Pearson left that out of the account, which changes the context 180. Do you know who Smith was, and who brother Joseph is? And what that lends to the account and story? He did not understand that the U&T was the seer stone.

What did he believe he had heard and now would change only if David would sign for the change?

That the U&T was the seer stone.

You just dug yourself a huge pit Markk... you don't even understand plain english...

Ralf, I showed you several times this, the U&T is another name for the seer stone.

..."They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters. ..."

Did Joseph Smith use the Seer Stone…or didn’t he? – Mormonism Research Ministry

www.mrm.org

Again Markk, what does "apparently" (seemingly) project to you... would you use such a word if you new for a fact someones statement used "apparently" as proof this was a legitimate fact or claim...

It means it is apparent that the Joseph use the seer stone to translate the BoM.

In fact, historical evidence shows that in addition to the two seer stones known as “interpreters,” Joseph Smith used at least one other seer stone in translating the Book of Mormon, often placing it into a hat in order to block out light. According to Joseph’s contemporaries, he did this in order to better view the words on the stone.16

By 1833, Joseph Smith and his associates began using the biblical term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to any stones used to receive divine revelations, including both the Nephite interpreters and the single seer stone.

Joseph the Seer

Joseph the Seer

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

 

[Richard7]

No, I CF'da letter by David Witmer to a person, the context is what David wrote. Please show me the searchers that would laugh at that. It would like be like saying Paul's Epistles are invalid because ewe don't know specifically who they were sent to. Whe you quote FAIR, do you know who authors the assertions.

When I quote Fair and its only their speculations or research that I will quote FAIR, but if its a quote by someone else I send the CF of the person being quoted.... in your case we mostly get speculations or personal attacks such as my intelligence or lack of focus... chuckle.

So who was the person David Witmere texted, you admitted you didn't know. So now that you state he Witmere texted such a letter, please copy and paste it...

Again you have no idea what the argument even is, which is what David Whitmer wrote and thought.

Where is it, please quote it four us.

LOL...huh, the point is that Pearson left that out of the account, which changes the context 180. Do you know who Smith was, and who brother Joseph is? And what that lends to the account and story? He did not understand that the U&T was the seer stone.


That the U&T was the seer stone.

Ralf, I showed you several times this, the U&T is another name for the seer stone.

..."They worked in much the same way, and the early Saints sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the seer stone as well as the interpreters. ..."

Did Joseph Smith use the Seer Stone…or didn’t he? – Mormonism Research Ministry

www.mrm.org

Conjecture Markk, formed with incomplete information dude.

It means it is apparent that the Joseph use the seer stone to translate the BoM.

Chuckle, oh how you wish that word was never used good buddy. Your again busted and will now have to face a big embarrassment of changing the facts by using a incorrect word that we all know was not in the paragraph.

No Marrk the word was apparently not apparent, did you think this un-intelligent wood worker would let that slide? chuckle. Oh! how the wicked and deceivers would go to such extremes as to take advantage of misinformation or disinformation and think no one would notice.

Apparently: seemingly, evidently, it seems (that), it appears (that), it would seem (that), it would appear (that), as far as one knows, by all accounts; ostensibly, outwardly, supposedly, on the face of it, so the story goes, so I'm told; allegedly, reputedly.

 

[Richard7]

When I quote Fair and its only their speculations or research that I will quote FAIR, but if its a quote by someone else I send the CF of the person being quoted.... in your case we mostly get speculations or personal attacks such as my intelligence or lack of focus... chuckle.

So who was the person David Witmere texted, you admitted you didn't know. So now that you state he Witmere texted such a letter, please copy and paste it...



Where is it, please quote it four us.




Conjecture Markk, formed with incomplete information dude.





Chuckle, oh how you wish that word was never used good buddy. Your again busted and will now have to face a big embarrassment of changing the facts by using a incorrect word that we all know was not in the paragraph.

No Marrk the word was apparently not apparent, did you think this un-intelligent wood worker would let that slide? chuckle. Oh! how the wicked and deceivers would go to such extremes as to take advantage of misinformation or disinformation and think no one would notice.

Apparently: seemingly, evidently, it seems (that), it appears (that), it would seem (that), it would appear (that), as far as one knows, by all accounts; ostensibly, outwardly, supposedly, on the face of it, so the story goes, so I'm told; allegedly, reputedly.

More silence.

 

[Markk]

When I quote Fair and its only their speculations or research that I will quote FAIR, but if its a quote by someone else I send the CF of the person being quoted.... in your case we mostly get speculations or personal attacks such as my intelligence or lack of focus... chuckle.

So who was the person David Witmere texted, you admitted you didn't know. So now that you state he Witmere texted such a letter, please copy and paste it...

Ralf I gave you the letter that David wrote. You stated you don’t read and research, which is obvious. Follow the thread start with post 177.

 

[Richard7]

Ralf I gave you the letter that David wrote. You stated you don’t read and research, which is obvious. Follow the thread start with post 177.

"In one of the first published interviews (Aug 16, 1878)6, David provides a traditional description of the Urim and Thummim where he says there “were two white stones, each of them cased in as spectacles are, in a kind of silver casing, but the bow between the stones was more heavy, and longer apart between the stones, than we usually find it in spectacles.” "

If you followed the foot notes, you would know that not much is known about Dr Paulson. Also, David later in a letter to a "S.T. Mouch, he complained about the interview that he did not make the statement he said I made. We don't have the letter of inquire to DW, just the letter in response...so we don't know what part of the interview David was complaining about.

But if we just take it as being all true...it confirms that the U&T were two stones in a spectacle...and as I have shown many times elder Nelson said this would be put into Joseph hat.

Ralf you always complain about 2nd, or more hand testimonies, yet this is a third hand interview. Paulson even say at the end of the interview, it was "mostly" word for word. It was printed 4 months after the interview.

Also note the newspaper editor writes that Whitmer, is "well preserved man."

There is more to read on this one-foot note...you can start here if you are interested in understanding what the truth is.

Early Mormon Documents: Volume 5 : Dan Vogel : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

In Volume Five: INTERVIEWS WITH BOOK OF MORMON WITNESS DAVID WHITMER, CONDUCTED BY: Joseph F. Smith & Orson Pratt William H. Kelley & George A. Blakeslee...
archive.org


Well here it is Markk, what is your point? He was corrected by David and yet he stated he heard him the first time very clearly...guess you missed that Markk.... my point is that David is so sketchy he even confuses his interviewers, states one thing and then demands it be changed.
States also that the plates were found by the seer stone, then take back after the lost 116 pages and Moroni never gave back the seer stones or the plates, then he say he was a witness of the plates when in the Whitmer home. He also stated he hated JS and wanted to be inserted as the Head of the Church. He rejected the Church and its teachings except for the Book of Mormon... its all history Markk, all you have to do is read the right sources and quit with your way off opinions and second and third hand accounts... David was only a first hand account to the viewing of the Gold plates shown by Moroni... all else good buddy he mostly made up...

 

[Richard7]

David Whitmere turned away from religion for 50 yrs and yet the progressive sit him at the head of the table, why? they are all about the New Mormonism and progressive thinking. They cannot believe that JS even had the first vision or found the gold plates without the seer stone.
They have to find fault with the individual but shy away from proving the Book of Mormon is a fake, or written and plagiarized by JS... fools, all of those progressive historians and their elitist thinking and self intelligent boasting... chuckle.

 

[Richard7]

For doubters that David Whitmer ever denied his testimony as one of the witness regariding seeing a angel and hearing the voice of God as he revealed the gold plates, Laban's sword, the Compass and the Urim and thummim...

A sampling of quotes from and about David Whitmer’s witness:​

“My testimony to the world is written concerning the Book of Mormon, and it is the same that I gave at first and it is the same as shall stand to my latest hour in life, linger with me in death and shine as Gospel Truth beyond the limits of life, among the Tribunals of Heaven, and [that] the Nations of the Earth will have known to[o] late the divine truth written on the pages of that book is the only sorrow of this servant of the Almighty Father.”

-David Whitmer to Mark H. Frorscutt, 2 March 1875, Scrapbook, 16-17; First-hand account.

---

“My testimony to the Book of Mormon is true and I am admonished neither to add to nor take from my testimony already appended to the Book. And if I should do so must be extremely guarded under the risk of being misunderstood.”

-David Whitmer, to Heman C. Smith, 5 December 1876, Community of Christ Library-Archives; First-hand account.

---

“As you read my testimony given many years ago, so it stands as my own existence; the same as when I gave it, and so shall stand throughout the cycles of eternity.”

-David Whitmer in letter to James N. Seymond, cited in Saints’ Herald 26 (15 July 1879): 223-24; cited in Dan Vogel, Early Mormon Documents, 5 vols, 5:219. First-hand account.

---

“My testimony as published in connection with the Book of Mormon is true—And why Should men ask to know more in regard to all the particulars connected with that all Overshadowing truth—If they will not believe the three and 8 witnesses would they believe though one Should arise from the dead, testify to its truth again?”

-David Whitmer, to S. T. Mouch, 18 November 1882, Richmond, Missouri, Whitmer Papers, Communty of Christ LIbrary-Archives; First-hand account.

---

“In June, 1829, the Lord called Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and myself as the three witnesses, to behold the vision of the Angel, as recorded in the fore part of the Book of Mormon, and to bear testimony to the world that the Book of Mormon is true. I was not called to bear testimony to the mission of Brother Joseph Smith any farther than his work of translating the Book of Mormon, as you can see by reading the testimony of us three witnesses.”

-David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ by a Witness to the Divine Authenticity of The Book of Mormon, 31; First-hand account.

---

“[O]f course would tell you about my vision of the Angel. You ask me if I saw the Angel when he brought the plates. I saw the angel when he brought the plates, and the Angel told us that we must bear testimony to the world, as contained in my testimony written in the Book of Mormon. Doubt not—sister—the Book of Mormon is the Word of God.”

-David Whitmer, to Sister Gates, 11 February 1887, Richmond, Missouri, David Whitmer Papers, Community of Christ Library-Archives; First-hand account.

---

“I did see the Angel as it is recorded in my testimony in the Book of Mormon. The Book is true.”

-David Whitmer, to Robert Nelson, 15 February 1887, Richmond, Missouri, David Whitmer Papers, Community of Christ Library-Archives; First-hand account.

---

“In regards to my testimony to the visitation of the angel, who declared to us three witnesses that the Book of Mormon is true, I have this to say: Of course we were in the spirit when we had the view, for no man can behold the face of an angel, except in a spiritual view, but we were in the body also, and everything was as natural to us, as it is at any time… A bright light enveloped us where we were, that filled [the woods as] at noon day, and there in a vision or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony in the Book of Mormon.”

-David Whitmer, to Anthony Metcalf, 2 April 1887; Ten Years before the Mast, 73-74; First-hand account.

---

“It is recorded in the American Cyclopedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica, that I, David Whitmer, have denied my testimony as one of the Three Witnesses to the divinity of the Book of Mormon: and that the two other witnesses, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, denied their testimony to that book. I will say once more to all mankind, that I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof. I also testify to the world, that neither Oliver Cowdery nor Martin Harris ever at any time denied their testimony. They both died affirming the truth of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”

-David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ by a Witness to the Divine Authenticity of The Book of Mormon. First-hand account.

 

[Janice Bower]

But wo, wo unto him who knoweth that he rebelleth against God! For salvation cometh to none such except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ. (Mosiah 3:12

That would mean that people doomed to the Telestial Kingdom are not saved. They have no faith in Christ OR your church.

 

[Janice Bower]

I have known him much longer than you Janice, we go way back and his attitude and character have taken a turn for the worst...

That doesn't qualify you as any kind of expert. Also, you don't know when I first posted at Carm. I believe that information was lost when the site went down. I remember posting to you under your previous user name.

 

[Magdalena]

That doesn't qualify you as any kind of expert. Also, you don't know when I first posted at Carm. I believe that information was lost when the site went down. I remember posting to you under your previous user name.

Which one of his previous viewer names? There were so many. Male and female.

 

[Janice Bower]

Which one of his previous viewer names? There were so many. Male and female.

OOPS! I was here when he was Ralph (spelling?); then I left for several years.

 

[Richard7]

That would mean that people doomed to the Telestial Kingdom are not saved. They have no faith in Christ OR your church.

Doomed or blessed to be in a Kingdom of Glory, I see the cup as half full and you see it as empty or half full... chuckle.
Doomed? like either Heaven or Hell, my goodness Janice, such a unloving god you worship....