FAIR - User contributions [en]

Roper: "a strange double-curved weapon held in the left hand of the warrior figure on the Loltún cave relief might be considered a scimitar/cimeter"

2017-06-06T20:47:57Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Uma estranha arma de curva dupla realizada na mão esquerda da figura guerreiro no alívio da caverna Loltun

{{FME-Source
|title=Roper: "a strange double-curved weapon held in the left hand of the warrior figure on the Loltún cave relief might be considered a scimitar/cimeter"
|category=Book of Mormon/Weapons/Scimitars
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Roper: "a strange double-curved weapon held in the left hand of the warrior figure on the Loltún cave relief might be considered a scimitar/cimeter"==
Matthew Roper: <ref>{{JBMS-8-1-6}}</ref>
<blockquote>
The possibility has been suggested that a strange double-curved weapon held in the left hand of the warrior figure on the Loltún cave relief might be considered a scimitar/cimeter.<ref>William J. Hamblin and A. Brent Merrill, "Swords in the Book of Mormon," in ''Warfare in the Book of Mormon'', ed. Stephen D. Ricks and William J. Hamblin (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990) 343.</ref> Its two blades curve in opposite directions from the ends of a central handle. Grube and Schele consider the object to be a weapon, and it looks something like a special version of the short-sword discussed above. We recall that the date for the figure at Loltún falls within the Book of Mormon period. Moreover, the Izapan art style in which the figure is carved originated in Pacific coastal Guatemala or southern Mexico. That region includes the territory thought by most Latter-day Saint researchers to have been the Nephite and Lamanite heartland. Thus the weapon shown at Loltún has a good chance of being one of the arms that Lamanites and Nephites were using during the central segment of Book of Mormon history. In fact, at Kaminaljuyu, the great ruined city in the valley of Guatemala, which many consider to have been the city of Nephi (or Lehi-Nephi), Stela 11 shows a warrior figure holding a curved object similar to that on the Loltún portrait. It may be even earlier than the one at Loltún, dating to the early Miraflores period (250 to 100 BC). Some Mesoamerican experts consider that the curved object on Stela 11 was the equivalent of the double-bladed weapon at Loltún.<ref>Antonio P. Andrews, "El 'Guerrero' de Loltún: Comentario Analítico," Boletún de la Escuela de Ciencias Antropológicas de la Universidad de Yucatán 8–9/48–49 (1981): 42; Lee A. Parsons, ''The Origins of Maya Art: Monumental Stone Sculpture of Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala, and the Southern Pacific Coast'' (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1986), 78–79.</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[pt:Uma estranha arma de curva dupla realizada na mão esquerda da figura guerreiro no alívio da caverna Loltun]]

Question: Are the ''Lectures on Faith'' not made available through Latter-day Saint sources?

2017-06-06T20:47:55Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: o ''Palestras sobre Fé'' não disponibilizados des fontes Mórmons?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Are the ''Lectures on Faith'' not made available through Latter-day Saint sources?
|category=Lectures on Faith
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Are the ''Lectures on Faith'' not made available through Latter-day Saint sources?==
===The ''Lectures on Faith'' are available through Deseret Book===

The ''Lectures on Faith'' are available through Church-owned Deseret Book in hardcover, softcover, illustrated and audio formats. They are also available in English and Spanish. (See: [http://deseretbook.com/store/search?query=Lectures+on+Faith Deseret Book: Lectures on Faith]). If there is an effort by the Church to hide or suppress them in any way, then they are not hiding them very well.

</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[de:Frage: Vorlesung über Glauben nicht durch HLT-Quellen verfügbar?]]
[[es:Pregunta: ¿Los "Discursos sobre la fe" no están disponibles a través de las fuentes de los Santos de los Últimos Días?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: o ''Palestras sobre Fé'' não disponibilizados des fontes Mórmons?]]

Question: Are the reasons for discipline ever made public?

2017-06-06T20:47:54Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: São as razões para a disciplina da Igreja já tornados públicos?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Are the reasons for discipline ever made public?
|category=Church discipline
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Are the reasons for discipline ever made public?==
===Church leaders and officials rarely make the reasons or evidences presented at disciplinary councils public===

Church leaders and officials rarely make the reasons or evidences presented at disciplinary councils public. Thus, former members are able to claim whatever they like about excommunication without contradiction from the Church.

D. Michael Quinn claims that his excommunication was the direct result of his historical research on the origins of Mormonism. He refused to attend his own disciplinary council, telling his stake president that it was "a process which was designed to punish me for being the messenger of unwanted historical evidence and to intimidate me from further work in Mormon history." <ref>D. Michael Quinn, Letter to Paul A. Hanks, 7 February 1993; cited in Lavina Fielding Anderson, "DNA Mormon: D. Michael Quinn," in ''Mormon Mavericks: Essays on Dissenters'', edited by John Sillito and Susan Staker (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 2002), 329-364.</ref>

Despite Quinn's belief that his Church discipline was all about his history, his stake president wrote back on 11 May 1993, saying "There are other matters that I need to talk with you about that are '''''not''''' related to your historical writings. These are very sensitive and highly confidential and this is why I have not mentioned them before in writing." <ref>Paul A. Hanks to D. Michael Quinn, 11 May 1993; cited in Anderson, "DNA Mormon."</ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Las razones de disciplina jamás se ha hecho público?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: São as razões para a disciplina da Igreja já tornados públicos?]]

Question: Did God tell Joseph Smith that all of the churches of the day were an "abomination"?

2017-06-06T20:47:52Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Será que Moroni dizer Joseph Smith que todas as igrejas do dia foram uma "abominação"?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Did Moroni tell Joseph Smith that all of the churches of the day were an "abomination"?
|category=
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Did God tell Joseph Smith that all of the churches of the day were an "abomination"?==
===Joseph did not claim that the ''churches'' of the day were "an abomination." He was told that their ''creeds'' were an abomination===
One critic claims,
<blockquote>
According to Mormon scripture, the founder of your church (Joseph Smith) was told by God in 1820 that all the churches of the day were "an abomination."
</blockquote>

Joseph did not claim that the ''churches'' of the day were "an abomination." He was told that their ''creeds'' were an abomination. According to Joseph Smith's history, he was told the following by Jesus Christ during the First Vision:
<blockquote>
I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[de:Frage: Wurde Joseph Smith gesagt, dass alle Kirchen jener Tage „ein Gräuel” waren?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Será que Moroni dizer Joseph Smith que todas as igrejas do dia foram uma "abominação"?]]

Question: Did Dee F. Green say that there is no such thing as Book of Mormon archaeology?

2017-06-06T20:47:48Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Será que Dee F. Green dizer que não existe tal coisa como Livro de Mórmon arqueologia?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Did Dee F. Green say that there is no such thing as Book of Mormon archaeology?
|category=Book of Mormon/Archaeology
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Did Dee F. Green say that there is no such thing as Book of Mormon archaeology?==
===Green argues that the concept of "Book of Mormon archaeology" is inadequate, and that a broader anthropological perspective is necessary===

Dee F. Green wrote the following in 1969:

<blockquote>
I am not impressed with allegations that Book of Mormon archaeology converts people to the Church. My personal preference in Church members still runs to those who have a faith-inspired commitment to Jesus Christ, and if their testimonies need bolstering by "scientific proof" of the Book of Mormon (or anything else for that matter), I am prone to suggest that the basis of the testimony could stand some re-examination. Having spent a considerable portion of the past ten years functioning as a scientist dealing with New World archaeology, I find that nothing in so-called Book of Mormon archaeology materially affects my religious commitment one way or the other, and I do not see that the archaeological myths so common in our proselytizing program enhance the process of true conversion….

What then, ought to be our approach to the Book of Mormon? In the first place it is a highly complex record demanding knowledge of a wide variety of anthropological skills from archaeology through ethnology to linguistics and culture change, with perhaps a little physical anthropology thrown in for good measure. No one man outside the Church, much less anyone inside, has command of the necessary information. Furthermore, it isn't just the accumulation of knowledge and skill which is important; the framework in which it is applied must fit. Such a framework can be found only by viewing the Book of Mormon against a picture of New World culture history drawn by the entire discipline of anthropology. Singling out archaeology, a sub-discipline of anthropology, to carry the burden, especially in the naive manner employed by our "Book of Mormon Archaeologists," has resulted in a lopsided promulgation of archaeological myth.

We have never looked at the Book of Mormon in a cultural context. We have mined its pages for doctrine, counsel, and historical events but failed to treat it as a cultural document which can teach something about the inclusive life patterns of a people. And if we are ever to show a relationship between the Book of Mormon and the New World, this step will have to be taken. It is the coincidence of the ''cultural'' history of the Book of Mormon with the cultural history of the New World that will tip the scales in our favor....

Several years ago John Sorenson drew an analogy with the Bible which bears repeating:

<blockquote>
Playing "the long shots," looking for inscriptions of a particular city, would be like placing the family bankroll on the gambling tables in Las Vegas. We might be lucky, but experience tells us not to plan on it. '''After lo, these many years of expensive research in Bible lands, there is still not final, incontrovertible proof of a single Biblical event from archaeology alone. The great value of all that effort has been in the broad demonstration that the Bible account fits the context time after time so exactly that no reasonable person can suppose other than that it is genuinely historic.''' Twenty years or less of systematic "painting the scenery" can yield the same sort of convincing background for the Book of Mormon, I believe. For too long Mormons have sought to "prove" the Book of Mormon authentic by what is really the-- most difficult kind of evidence--historical particulars. In the light of logic and the experience of Biblical archaeology it appears far safer to proceed on the middle ground of seeking general contextual confirmation, even though the results may not be so spectacular as many wish. In any case such a procedure-- the slow building up of a picture and a case--will leave us with a body of new knowledge and increased understanding of the times, manner, and circumstances when Book of Mormon events took place which seems to some of us likely to have more enduring value than “proof.”{{io}} {{ea}}
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

===A dated source===

The reference is from ''1969''. Green was a believing archaeologist; believing archaeologists now have more positive things to say about whether archaeology can tell us anything about the Book of Mormon. For a more current assessment, see:
* {{JBMS-14-2-8}}
* [[Book of Mormon archeology|Book of Mormon archaeology]]

===The manner in which critics of the Church use this quote distorts Green's message and intent===

The manner in which critics of the Church use this quote distorts Green's message and intent. A few representative quotes demonstrate that Green is not dismissing the possibility of Book of Mormon archaeology. Instead, Green insists that the approaches taken up to 1969 were inadequate, and misdirected:

* Among the morass of archaeological half-truths and falsehoods which we have perpetrated in the name of Book of Mormon archaeology, only Jakeman's suggestion of a limited geography and Sorenson's insistence on a cautious, highly controlled trait-complex approach are worth considering. The ink we have spilled on Book of Mormon archaeology has probably done more harm than good.
* I am not impressed with allegations that Book of Mormon archaeology converts people to the Church. My personal preference in Church members still runs to those who have a faith-inspired commitment to Jesus Christ, and if their testimonies need bolstering by "scientific proof" of the Book of Mormon (or anything else for that matter), I am prone to suggest that the basis of the testimony could stand some re-examination. Having spent a considerable portion of the past ten years functioning as a scientist dealing with New World archaeology, I find that nothing in so-called Book of Mormon archaeology materially affects my religious commitment one way or the other, and I do not see that the archaeological myths so common in our proselytizing program enhance the process of true conversion.
* The first myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists. Titles on books full of archaeological half-truths, dilettanti on the peripheries of American archaeology calling themselves Book of Mormon archaeologists regardless of their education, and a Department of Archaeology at BYU [note 16 reads: Fortunately now changed to the Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, with such qualified men as Merlin Myers, Ray T. Matheny, and Dale Berge giving students a sound and realistic education in anthropology.] devoted to the production of Book of Mormon archaeologists do not insure that Book of Mormon archaeology really exists. If one is to study Book of Mormon archaeology, then one must have a corpus of data with which to deal. We do not. The Book of Mormon is really there so one can have Book of Mormon studies, and archaeology is really there so one can study archaeology, but the two are not wed. '''At least they are not wed in reality since no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography'''. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem then that a concentration on geography should be the first order of business, but we have already seen that twenty years of such an approach has left us empty-handed (italics in original).

* Another myth which needs dispelling is our Lamanite syndrome. Most American Indians are neither descendants of Laman nor necessarily of Book of Mormon peoples. The Book itself makes no such claim....

* Finally, I should like to lay at rest the myth that by scurrying around Latin America looking for horses and wheels we can prove the Book of Mormon.

===Green also praises some aspects of the approach taken by the Church and a few scholars===

* ...only Jakeman's suggestion of a limited geography and Sorenson's insistence on a cautious, highly controlled trait-complex approach are worth considering.

* Considerable embarrassment over the various unscholarly postures assumed by the geographical-historical school resulted in the Church Archaeological Committee's attitude that interpretation should be an individual matter, that is, that any archaeology officially sponsored by the Church (i.e., the monies for which are provided by tithing) should concern itself only with the culture history interpretations normally within the scope of archaeology, and any attempt at correlation or interpretation involving the Book of Mormon should be eschewed. This enlightened policy, much to the gratification of the true professional archaeologist both in and outside the Church, has been scrupulously followed. It was made quite plain to me in 1963 when I was first employed by the BYU-NWAF [New World Archaeological Foundation] that my opinions with regard to Book of Mormon archaeology were to be kept to myself, and my field report was to be kept entirely from any such references.

<blockquote>
Some of my colleagues and students, both in and out of the Church, have wondered if perhaps the real reason for the Church's involvement in archaeology (especially since it is centered in Mesoamerica with emphasis on the Preclassic period) is to help prove the Book of Mormon. While this may represent the individual thinking of some members of the Church Archaeological Committee, it has not intruded itself on the work of the foundation except to limit its activities to the preclassic cultures of Mesoamerica. Regardless of individual or group motives, however, the approach of the BYU-NWAF has been outstandingly successful. My numerous non-Church colleagues in Mesoamerican archaeology hold high regard for the work of the foundation and for most of its staff. Gareth Lowe, director of the BYU-NWAF, is as good a Mesoamerican archaeologist as there is in the country, and the foundation's outstanding publication series (which never mentions the Book of Mormon) consistently received good reviews in the professional literature.
</blockquote>

===Green is calling for a different approach===

* What then, ought to be our approach to the Book of Mormon? In the first place it is a highly complex record demanding knowledge of a wide variety of anthropological skills from archaeology through ethnology to linguistics and culture change, with perhaps a little physical anthropology thrown in for good measure. No one man outside the Church, much less anyone inside, has command of the necessary information. Furthermore, it isn't just the accumulation of knowledge and skill which is important; the framework in which it is applied must fit. Such a framework can be found only by viewing the Book of Mormon against a picture of New World culture history drawn by the entire discipline of anthropology. Singling out archaeology, a sub-discipline of anthropology, to carry the burden, especially in the naive manner employed by our "Book of Mormon Archaeologists," has resulted in a lopsided promulgation of archaeological myth.

* We have never looked at the Book of Mormon in a cultural context. We have mined its pages for doctrine, counsel, and historical events but failed to treat it as a cultural document which can teach something about the inclusive life patterns of a people. And if we are ever to show a relationship between the Book of Mormon and the New World, this step will have to be taken. It is the coincidence of the cultural history of the Book of Mormon with the cultural history of the New World that will tip the scales in our favor.

Not surprisingly, it is this approach recommended by Green that has borne fruit in the thirty-five years since his article.

Also not surprisingly, this fact is carefully hidden from the critic's audience.

* For an up-to-date assessment of the Book of Mormon and archaeology, see:
**{{JBMS-14-2-8}}
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Becoming Gods]]
[[Category:Losing a Lost Tribe]]
[[Category:One Nation Under Gods]]
[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Dee F. Green dijo que no hay tal cosa como la arqueología del Libro de Mormón?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Será que Dee F. Green dizer que não existe tal coisa como Livro de Mórmon arqueologia?]]

Question: Was the ''View of the Hebrews'' theory of Book of Mormon origin advanced during the lifetime of Joseph Smith?

2017-06-06T20:47:46Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Se desenvolveu a teoria da origem do Livro de Mórmon proveniente do "View of the Hebrews" durante a vida de Joseph Smith?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Was the ''View of the Hebrews'' theory of Book of Mormon origin advanced during the lifetime of Joseph Smith?
|category=Book of Mormon/Authorship theories/View of the Hebrews
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Was the ''View of the Hebrews'' theory of Book of Mormon origin advanced during the lifetime of Joseph Smith?==
===The theory the Joseph Smith plagiarized ''View of the Hebrews'' was never advanced during Joseph Smith's lifetime===

The theory the Joseph Smith plagiarized ''View of the Hebrews'' was never advanced during his lifetime. The prevailing theory of the day was the [[Book of Mormon and Spaulding manuscript|Spalding Theory]], which quickly lost credibility upon the discovery of an actual Spalding manuscript in 1884 which bore no resemblance to the Book of Mormon. There are no records which indicate that Joseph Smith came into contact with the ''View of the Hebrews'' during the period of time that he was translating the Book of Mormon. The ''View of the Hebrews'' theory was in fact first proposed by I. Woodbridge Riley in 1902, 58 years after the death of the prophet.<ref>{{CriticalWork:Riley:Founder_of_Mormonism|pages=124–126}}</ref>

===Joseph Smith quoted ''View of the Hebrews'' as ''supporting'' the Book of Mormon===

There was, however, a reference to ''View of the Hebrews'' within Joseph Smith's lifetime, but it came from the prophet himself. In an article published in the ''Times and Seasons'' on June 1, 1842, Joseph quoted ''View of the Hebrews'' in support of the Book of Mormon:

:If such may have been the fact, that a part of the Ten Tribes came over to America, in the way we have supposed, leaving the cold regions of Assareth behind them in quest of a milder climate, it would be natural to look for tokens of the presence of Jews of some sort, along countries adjacent to the Atlantic. In order to this, we shall here make an extract from an able work: written exclusively on the subject of the Ten Tribes having come from Asia by the way of Bherings Strait, by the Rev. Ethan Smith, Pultney, Vt., who relates as follows: "Joseph Merrick, Esq., a highly respectable character in the church at Pittsfield, gave the following account: That in 1815, he was leveling some ground under and near an old wood shed, standing on a place of his, situated on (Indian Hill)... [Joseph then discusses the supposed phylacteries found among Amerindians, citing ''View of the Hebrews'' p. 220, 223.]<ref>{{TSfairwiki| author=Joseph Smith, Jr.| vol=3|num=15|article=From Priest's American Antiquities|date=1 June 1842|start=813|end=815 }} </ref>

It strains credulity to claim that Joseph drew attention to the work from which he derived most of his ideas. Why would he call attention to the source of his forgery?
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:An Insider's View of Mormon Origins]]
[[Category:Becoming Gods]]
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:Losing a Lost Tribe]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:No Man Knows My History]]
[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Era la teoría de que "Vista de los Hebreos" fue el origen del Libro de Mormón propuso durante la vida de José Smith?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Se desenvolveu a teoria da origem do Livro de Mórmon proveniente do "View of the Hebrews" durante a vida de Joseph Smith?]]

Question: What was the size of each of the gold plates?

2017-06-06T20:47:43Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Qual foi o tamanho de cada uma das placas de ouro?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: What was the size of each of the gold plates?
|category=Book of Mormon/Translation/Plates
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: What was the size of each of the gold plates?==
===Each plate was approximately 6 to 7 inches wide and 7 to 8 inches long===

* "7 inches in length, 6 inches in breadth" <ref>{{CriticalWork:AS:Golden Bible|pages=3, quoting Cowdery}}</ref> - Quoting Oliver Cowdery
* "six inches wide by eight inches long"<ref>{{TS1|author=Joseph Smith Jr.|article=Church History [also known as the Wentworth Letter]|date=1 March 1842|start=707}}</ref> —Joseph Smith Jr.
* "seven inches wide by eight inches in length"<ref>Martin Harris interview, ''Tiffany's Monthly'', May 1859, 165. </ref> —Martin Harris
* "seven by eight inches"<ref>Martin Harris interview, ''Iowa State Register'', August 1870, as quoted in Backman, ''Eyewitness Accounts'', 226.</ref> —Martin Harris
* "about eight inches long, seven inches wide"<ref>David Whitmer interview, ''Chicago Tribune'', 24 January 1888, in ''David Whitmer Interviews'', ed. Cook, 221.</ref> —David Whitmer
* "about eight inches square" - quoting David Whitmer <ref>ED Howe, ''Mormonism Unvailed'', 15; attributed to David Whitmer {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=808&REC=3}}</ref>
* "six or eight inches square" - Critical newspaper<ref>{{CriticalWork:Fredonia Censor:7 March 1832|pages=xxx}}</ref>
* "The plates were each about 7 by 8 inches in width and length." - Parley P. Pratt <ref>{{MS1|author=Parley P. Pratt|article=Discovery of an Ancient Record in America|vol=1|num=2|date=June 1840|pages=30–37}} {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=2345&REC=13}}</ref>
* "about eight inches long, and six wide" - Lucy Mack Smith (allegedly)<ref>{{CriticalWork:Caswall:City of the Mormons 2|pages=26}}</ref>
* "Each plate was about six by eight inches"<ref>{{Book:Appleby:Dissertation of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream|pages=1–24}}</ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:An Insider's View of Mormon Origins]]
[[Category:No Man Knows My History]]

[[pt:Pergunta: Qual foi o tamanho de cada uma das placas de ouro?]]

Question: Which method of translation was more "believable": seer stone or Nephite interpreters?

2017-06-06T20:47:42Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Qual o método de tradução era mais plausível: a Pedra Vidente ou os Intérpretes Nefitas?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Which method of translation was more "believable": seer stone or Nephite interpreters?
|category=Book of Mormon/Translation/Method
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Which method of translation was more "believable": seer stone or Nephite interpreters?==
===One must choose which seer stone is more "believable"===
Joseph Smith always claimed that the translation was performed by the "gift and power of God." So which translation method is more "believable"?

#Joseph used the Nephite interpreters, which consisted of two seer stones mounted in a frame that resembled a set of "spectacles." He looked into the stones and somehow deduced the English text of the characters written on the plates. The assumption that many make is that Joseph was using the "spectacles" like a pair of glasses that converted the characters into English, and thus required a direct view of the plates. There is, however, indication that Joseph may have placed the Nephite interpreter into his hat. Here is what the Church says about it: "According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument." <ref>[http://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng "Book of Mormon Translation,"] ''Gospel Topics'' on LDS.org</ref>
#Joseph placed the seer stone in a hat to block out the light, and somehow deduced the English text of the characters written on the plates. The plates remained covered by a cloth on the table, as reported by many witnesses.

So both methods use seer stones, and both methods may have used the hat to block out light.

Which method is more "believable"? Ultimately, one must accept or reject the idea that the text of the Book of Mormon was revealed to Joseph Smith through revelation, by the "gift and power of God," regardless of the rather unbelievable details of the exact instruments and method used to achieve this.
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Qué método de la traducción era más "creíble": piedra vidente o intérpretes nefitas?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Qual o método de tradução era mais plausível: a Pedra Vidente ou os Intérpretes Nefitas?]]

Question: What are the Hurlbut affidavits?

2017-06-06T20:47:39Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Quais são os depoimentos Hurlbut?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: What are the Hurlbut affidavits?
|category=Hurlbut affidavits
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: What are the Hurlbut affidavits?==
===The Hurlbut affidavits are a collection of affidavits from Joseph Smith’s neighbors which claim that the Smith family possessed a number of character flaws===

Many critics cite a collection of affidavits from Joseph Smith’s neighbors which claim that the Smith family possessed a number of character flaws. These affidavits were collected by Doctor Philastus Hurlbut ("Doctor" was his first name, not a title). <ref>"Doctor" was not a title—It was Hurlbut's actual given name.</ref> Hurlbut had been excommunicated from the Church on charges of "unvirtuous conduct with a young lady," <ref>Benjamin Winchester, ''The origin of the Spalding story, concerning the Manuscript Found; with a short biography of Dr. P. Hulbert, the originator of the same; and some testimony adduced, showing it to be a sheer fabrication, so far as in connection with the Book of Mormon is concerned.'' (Philadelphia: Brown, Bicking & Guilbert, Printers, 1834), p. 5.</ref> and for threatening the life of the Prophet.

#There are many statements from Joseph's contemporaries attesting to his good character—These people did not sign sworn affidavits, but their accounts are recorded in their journals and histories.
#It is also important to note that none of these statements regarding Joseph Smith, Jr. was a firsthand account from the Prophet himself, but instead represent second or third-hand accounts. It is interesting that Fawn Brodie and other modern anti-Mormons readily dismiss the affidavits supporting the Spalding theory (which has since been [[Book_of_Mormon/Authorship_theories/Spalding_manuscript|discredited]]), suggesting the Hurlbut "prompted" those making statements, yet accepts without question the affidavits attesting to the bad character of Joseph Smith and his family.
#Finally, Hurlbut's motive in collecting the affidavits is a factor. The Hurlbut affidavits were collected by a man who not only had a grudge to settle with the Church, but who had actually been brought before a judge for issuing a death threat against Joseph Smith, Jr. His family had likewise lost a court case brought by the Smiths, and young Joseph's testimony played a significant role in their victory. (This occurred despite the Hurlbuts being more wealthy and prominent in the community than the poverty-stricken Smiths.)

===Hurlbut had been hostile to the Smith family long before he collected his affidavits===

Hurlbut's hostility to the Smiths may have been of long date. In 1819, the Smiths sued a local family of Hurlbuts over the sale of a pair of horses and some work they had done for him. (Aside from the name, it is not known if there was a family connection.) One author explains:

<blockquote>
Joseph Smith's introduction to the legal system came at an early age. His father and oldest brother, Alvin, initiated a lawsuit in January 1819 against Jeremiah Hurlbut arising from his sale of a pair of horses to the Smiths for $65. The Smith boys had been working for Hurlbut to both pay down the $65 obligation and for other goods the previous summer. Twelve witnesses were called during the trial, including Hyrum and Joseph Smith Jr. Under New York law, being just thirteen, Joseph's testimony about the work he had performed was admissible only after the court found him competent. His testimony proved credible and the court record indicates that ever item that he testified about was included in the damages awarded to the Smiths. Although Hurlbut appealed the case, no records have survived noting the final disposition of that case; perhaps it was settled out of court. The significance of this case is not limited to the fact that a New York judge found the young Joseph, just a year prior to his [[Joseph_Smith's_First_Vision|First Vision]], to be competent and credible as a witness. Also, the suit being brought against a prominent Palmyra family and involving two other prominent community leaders as sureties on appeal may have contributed to Joseph Smith Jr.'s memory of his family's estrangement from much of the Palmyra community....

Under applicable New York law, "qualified citizens" [for jury duty] were limited to male inhabitants of the county where the trial was being held between the ages of twenty-one and sixty; and who at the time had personal property in the amount of not less that $250 or real property in the county with a value of not less than $250. In the rural community of Palmyra this effectively meant that those qualified to be on the jury would be the more affluent and prominent men of the area. Ironically, none of the Smiths would have qualified to be a juror.

The trial was held on February 6, 1819. Twelve jurors were impaneled, all men and property owners. The Smiths called five witnesses, Hurlbut [the farmer they were suing] seven. Both Joseph Jr. and Hyrum were called to testify. This appears to be young Joseph's first direct interaction with the judicial [130] process. He had turned thirteen years old a month and a half previously. New York law and local practice permitted the use of child testimony, subject to the court's discretion to determine the witness' competency. The test for competency required a determination that the witness was of 'sound mind and memory.' A New York 1803 summary of the law for justices of the peace notes that 'all persons of sound mind and memory, and who have arrived at years of discretion, except such as are legally interested, or have been rendered infamous, may be improved as witnesses.' This determination of competency rested within the discretion of the judge....

From the record it appears that Judge Spear found Joseph Jr. competent, and he indeed did testify during the trial. This is evident in a review of the List of Services that was part of the court file. Joseph Jr.'s testimony would have been required to admit those services he personally performed....<ref>{{Periodical:Walker:Joseph Smith's Introduction to the Law|pages=129-130}}</ref>
</blockquote>

===Hurlbut's collection of the statements was made at the request of an anti-Mormon committee in Kirtland, Ohio===

At any rate, Hurlbut's later collection of statements was made at the request of an anti-Mormon committee in Kirtland, Ohio. <ref>{{CHC1 | vol=1|start=41}}</ref> According to B.H. Roberts:

<blockquote>
It was simply a matter of "muck raking" on Hurlbut's part. Every idle story, every dark insinuation which at that time could be thought of and unearthed was pressed into service to gratify this man's personal desire for revenge, and to aid the enemies of the Prophet in their attempt to destroy his influence and overthrow the institution then in process of such remarkable development. <ref>{{CHC1 | vol=1|start=41}}</ref>
</blockquote>

===Hurlbut was unable to publish the affidavits himself after his trial for making death threats against Joseph Smith, so he sold them to E.D. Howe for publication in his book ''Mormonism Unvailed''===

Hurlbut was unable to publish the affidavits himself after his trial for making death threats against Joseph Smith, Jr. (And, it is possible that his family's animus dated back far longer.) He sold his material to Eber D. Howe, who published it in his anti-Mormon book ''Mormonism Unvailed'' in 1834. In addition to the affidavits attacking the character of the Smith family, Hurlbut gathered statements from the family and neighbors of Solomon Spalding in order to "prove" that Spalding's unpublished manuscript was the source for the Book of Mormon. ''Mormonism Unvailed'' contained the first presentation of the [[Book of Mormon and Spaulding manuscript|Spalding theory]] of ''Book of Mormon'' origin. Some critics, such as [[Fawn McKay Brodie|Fawn Brodie]], are selective in their acceptance of Hurlbut's affidavits—They readily accept affidavits that attack the character of the Smith family, yet admit that some "judicious prompting" by Hurlbut may have been involved in those affidavits that were gathered to support the Spalding theory. <ref>Fawn M. Brodie, [[No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith|''No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith'']] (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 446–447.</ref>

===E.D. Howe thought that Joseph was "lazy," "indolent" and "superstitious"===

Howe's bias is evident throughout the book. He introduces the Smith family with the following:

<blockquote>
All who became intimate with them during this period, unite in representing the general character of old Joseph and wife, the parents of the pretended Prophet, as lazy, indolent, ignorant and superstitious—having a firm belief in ghosts and witches; the telling of fortunes; pretending to believe that the earth was filled with hidden treasures, buried there by Kid or the Spaniards. <ref>Eber D. Howe, ''Mormonism Unvailed'' (Painesville, OH: Telegraph Press, 1834), p. 11.</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:Becoming Gods]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:No Man Knows My History]]
[[Category:One Nation Under Gods]]

[[pt:Pergunta: Quais são os depoimentos Hurlbut?]]

Question: Can a person "feel the spirit" while watching movies?

2017-06-06T20:47:38Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Por que eu iria "sentir o espírito" ao assistir filmes de ficção?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Can a person "feel the spirit" while watching movies?
|category=Spiritual witness
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Can a person "feel the spirit" while watching movies?==
===The Spirit testifies of all true principles, regardless of the source===
Why would I "feel the spirit" when watching fictional movies? Some of these movies are even violent and R-rated, such as ''Saving Private Ryan'' and ''Schindler's List''.

The Spirit testifies of all truth. The Spirit can testify of true principles taught or portrayed in fiction as well as in real life. For example, why would one feel so compelled by the story of ''Les Miserables''? After all, the movie portrays prostitutes, thieves, and blasphemers. However, the message is of the importance of mercy over justice, of self-sacrifice, and of forgiveness. Why wouldn't the Holy Ghost tell us these are true principles? The same can be said of many movies, including animated films such as ''The Lion King''.

Also, one should not equate the witness of the spirit with emotion. Just because an experience generates a pleasant emotional response does not mean that you are "feeling the spirit." Just because one can "feel the spirit" regarding religious matters does not mean that one is unable to feel good or inspired about anything else.

The movies ''Saving Private Ryan'' and ''Schindler's List'' are very accurate and profound dramas that depict certain important historical events: In this case, the D-day invasion and the Holocaust. Yes, they are, out of necessity, R-rated and violent movies, nevertheless they are still deeply moving. We are moved by these portrayals because we empathize with the sacrifice and suffering of those depicted. Just because we seek "confirmation of the spirit" in religious matters in order to receive confirmation of their truthfulness does not require us to be "dead in feeling" to the rest of life.
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]



[[es:Pregunta: ¿Puede una persona "sentir el espíritu" mientras ve las películas?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Por que eu iria "sentir o espírito" ao assistir filmes de ficção?]]

Question: Why did B.H. Roberts write ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''?

2017-06-06T20:47:36Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Por que B. H. Roberts escrever ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Why did B.H. Roberts write ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''?
|category=
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Why did B.H. Roberts write ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''?==
===B.H. Roberts wrote the material contained in ''Studies of the Book of Mormon'' to illustrate the positions that ''critics'' would take===

Critics use B.H. Roberts' critical evaluation of Book of Mormon difficulties to support their arguments. B.H. Roberts wrote the material contained in ''Studies of the Book of Mormon'' to illustrate the positions that ''critics'' would take. He was playing "devil's advocate" for the purpose of inspiring Church leadership to work on a better defense (as critics typically point out, Roberts was a "LDS apologist"). For instance, regarding Lucy Mack Smith's description of Joseph giving "amusing recitals" of ancient Americans, Roberts presented the critical conclusion that "These evening recitals could come from no other source than the vivid, constructive imagination of Joseph Smith, a remarkable power which attended him through all his life. It was as strong and varied as Shakespeare's and no more to be accounted for than the English Bard's."

From Lucy Mack Smith's history:
<blockquote>
"From this time forth, Joseph continued to receive instructions from the Lord, and we continued to get the children together every night evening, for the purpose of listening while he gave us a relation of the same. I presume our family presented an aspect as singular as any that ever lived upon the face of the earth-all seated in a circle, father, mother, sons and daughters, and giving the most profound attention to a boy, eighteen years of age, who had never read the Bible through in his life; he seemed much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children...
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}



[[pt:Pergunta: Por que B. H. Roberts escrever ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''?]]

Question: Why should the poor and destitute pay tithing?

2017-06-06T20:47:35Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Por que a pobres e indigentes dízimo de pagamento?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Why should the poor and destitute pay tithing?
|category=Church finances
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Why should the poor and destitute pay tithing?==
===Biblical precedent for the idea that even those that are destitute will be blessed by the Lord if they pay their tithing===

Critics of the Church often portray it as a business or corporation, with tithing being the method by which income is generated. If this were true, however, why would the Church be interested in the "widow's mite?" Critics often act as if the Church simply takes money from the poor and leaves them to fend for themselves. The reality is that the Church will not only support the destitute, but it will assist them in finding employment or means to create better circumstances in their lives. The Church does not force anyone to choose to pay tithing ''or'' to feed their children. The choice presented by the critics is a caricature which completely ignores the function of the Church Welfare program.

Paying tithing is a matter of faith. From a believer's perspective, a more accurate description than "pay what little they have to a multi-billion megamall owning Church" would be to "donate'' one-tenth'' of what little they have to the Lord."

There is a Biblical precedent for the idea that even those that are destitute will be blessed by the Lord if they pay their tithing. <ref>Elder Lynn G. Robbins, "Tithing—a Commandment Even for the Destitute," April 2005 General Conference {{link|url=http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2005/04/tithing-a-commandment-even-for-the-destitute?lang=eng}}</ref>:
<blockquote>
The Lord says to Elijah, “Arise, get thee to Zarephath … : behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee” (1 Kgs. 17:9). It is interesting that Elijah is not told to go to Zarephath until the widow and her son are at the point of death. It is at this extreme moment—facing starvation—that her faith will be tested.
 
As he comes into the city he sees her gathering sticks.
 
“And he called to her, and said, Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink.
 
“And as she was going to fetch it, he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand.
 
“And she said, As the Lord thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but an handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, behold, I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die” (1 Kgs. 17:10–12).
 
A handful of meal would be very little indeed, perhaps just enough for one serving, which makes Elijah’s response intriguing. Listen: “And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go and do as thou hast said: but make me thereof a little cake first” (1 Kgs. 17:13; emphasis added).
 
Now doesn’t that sound selfish, asking not just for the first piece, but possibly the only piece? Didn't our parents teach us to let other people go first and especially for a gentleman to let a lady go first, let alone a starving widow? Her choice—does she eat, or does she sacrifice her last meal and hasten death? Perhaps she will sacrifice her own food, but could she sacrifice the food meant for her starving son?
 
Elijah understood the doctrine that blessings come after the trial of our faith (see Ether 12:6; D&C 132:5). He wasn't being selfish. As the Lord’s servant, Elijah was there to give, not to take. Continuing from the narrative:
 
“But make me thereof a little cake first [the firstlings], and bring it unto me, and after make for thee and for thy son.
 
“For thus saith the Lord God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the Lord sendeth rain upon the earth.
 
“And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he, and her house, did eat many days.
 
“And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by Elijah” (1 Kgs. 17:13–16; emphasis added).
</blockquote>

Mark 12:41–44 gives us the story of the widows mite:
<blockquote>
And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much. 
And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing. 
And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury: 
For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Por qué los pobres e indigentes diezmo de pago?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Por que a pobres e indigentes dízimo de pagamento?]]

Question: Where was the Melchizedek Priesthood restored?

2017-06-06T20:47:33Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Onde foi o sacerdócio de Melquisedeque restaurado?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Where was the Melchizedek Priesthood restored?
|category=Priesthood/Restoration
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Where was the Melchizedek Priesthood restored?==
===The bestowal of the Melchizedek priesthood occurred in Harmony, but the ordination to offices was deferred until later===

The bestowal of the Melchizedek priesthood occurred in Harmony, Pennsylvania. <ref>{{scripture||D&C|128|20}}; {{HoC | vol=1|start=40|end=41 }}</ref> The time of travel between Harmony, PA and the Whitmer farm would have been three days. The likelihood of the men traveling back to Harmony at the same time as they did the following is near impossible:
:* Finished the translation
:* Secured the copyright on June 11
:* Oliver's letter to Hyrum on June 14
:* Joseph's details of how busy they were during this time period at the farm <ref>{{HoC | vol=1|start=51|end=51 }}</ref>

As shown above, after receiving the priesthood they were not yet allowed to ordain each other to the offices within that priesthood. They were told to “defer this our ordination until such times as it should be practicable to have our brethren, who had been and who should be baptized, assembled together, when we must have their sanction to our proceeding to ordain each other.” <ref>{{HoC | vol=1|start=60|end=61 }}; emphasis added.</ref>

There are many times<ref>Reuben Miller Journal, 21 Oct. 1848, MS 1392, LDS Church Archives.</ref> when Oliver confirmed without error that the sequence of events occurred as shown above.<ref>Statement of Oliver Cowdery to Samuel W. Richards, 13 Jan. 1849, quoted in Deseret Evening News, 22 March 1884, 2.</ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:Becoming Gods]]
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Cuando se restauró el Sacerdocio de Melquisedec?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Onde foi o sacerdócio de Melquisedeque restaurado?]]

Question: Is the Book of Mormon reference to windows that can be "dashed in pieces" an anachronism?

2017-06-06T20:47:30Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Das Buch Mormon/Anachronismen/Fenster, es:El Libro de Mormón/Anacronismos/Ventanas

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Is the Book of Mormon reference to windows that can be "dashed in pieces" an anachronism?
|category=-
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Is the Book of Mormon reference to windows that can be "dashed in pieces" an anachronism?==
===It seems likely that Ether 2:23 means that the barges themselves would break if they had windows or openings built into them===

{{s||Ether|2|23}}:
<blockquote>
What will ye that I should do that ye may have light in your vessels? For behold, ye cannot have windows, for they will be dashed in pieces;
</blockquote>

The mention of windows that could be "dashed in pieces" in Ether 2:23 seems to be anachronistic, since glass windows were not invented until the late Middle Ages. However, the term "window" originally referred to an opening through which the wind could enter. It is found 42 times in the Bible, where it does not refer to glass windows as we know them. In one passage ({{b|2|Kings|13|17}}), we read that a window in the palace was opened. So windows sometimes had doors or shutters. The same is true of the window that Noah built into the ark ({{b||Genesis|6|16}}; {{b||Genesis|8|6}}).

It seems likely that {{s||Ether|2|23}} means that the barges themselves would break if they had windows or openings built into them. In the next verse, the Lord explains that this is because they would go through extremely turbulent conditions at sea, sometimes being buried beneath the waves. Windows would mean weakening the wooden structure, by creating openings, making it more fragile and thus liable to be "dashed in pieces." If we read only the sentence containing the word "windows" and read it out of context, then the antecedent of "they" would, indeed, be "windows." But it is probable that the antecedent is "vessels," the last word in the preceding sentence.<ref>FARMS "Question of the Week," ''farms.byu.edu''{{link|url=http://farms.byu.edu/questionday.php?id=16}}</ref>

<videoflash>uq3mRE5IIc8</videoflash>

</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}



[[de:Das Buch Mormon/Anachronismen/Fenster]]
[[es:El Libro de Mormón/Anacronismos/Ventanas]]
[[pt:Pergunta: O Livro de Mórmon referência às janelas que podem ser "dahed em pedaços" um anacronismo?]]

Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?

2017-06-06T20:47:28Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: O Livro de Mórmon não é uma obra antiga, pois contém "palavras gregas", tais como "Alfa e Ômega"??

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?
|category=Book of Mormon
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?==
===The words "alpha and omega" or "Christ" are as unlikely to be on the plates as the English word "sword" or "house"—these are ''translations.''===

The Book of Mormon claims to be a ''translation.'' Therefore, the language used is that of Joseph Smith. Joseph could choose to render similar (or identical) material using King James Bible language if that adequately represented the text's intent.

The words "alpha and omega" are as unlikely to be on the plates as the English word "sword" or "house"—these are ''translations.''

All "alpha and omega" tells us is that there was some expression on the plates similar to "from A to Z," or "from first to last."

The word "Christ" is a Greek translation of the Hebrew messiah, which means “the anointed one.” The word "Christ" was used by the translator, Joseph Smith, to describe the messiah.

Only if we presume that the Book of Mormon is a fraud at the outset is this proof of anything. If we assume that it is a translation, then the use of Bible language tells us merely that Joseph used biblical language.

This unconvincing complaint is similar to another anti-Mormon favorite, the issue of the [[Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms/"Adieu"_in_the_Book_of_Mormon|"French word" ''adieu'']] in the Book of Mormon.

</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[pt:Pergunta: O Livro de Mórmon não é uma obra antiga, pois contém "palavras gregas", tais como "Alfa e Ômega"??]]

Question: What did Joshua Stafford claim about Joseph Smith in the Hurlbut affidavits?

2017-06-06T20:47:27Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: O que Joshua Stafford reclamar sobre Joseph Smith nos depoimentos Hurlbut?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: What did Joshua Stafford claim about Joseph Smith in the Hurlbut affidavits?
|category=Hurlbut affidavits
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: What did Joshua Stafford claim about Joseph Smith in the Hurlbut affidavits?==
===Joshua Stafford claimed that the Smith family became "indolent" after "digging for hidden treasures"===

*Claimed that the Smith family became "indolent" after "digging for hidden treasures."
*Claimed that the Smith family told stories of "ghosts, hob-goblins and caverns."

*{{Detail|Joseph Smith/Early Smith family history/Lazy Smiths|l1=Lazy Smiths?}}
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:One Nation Under Gods]]

[[pt:Pergunta: O que Joshua Stafford reclamar sobre Joseph Smith nos depoimentos Hurlbut?]]

Question: What "non-parallels" are apparent in a comparison of View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?

2017-06-06T20:47:25Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: O "não-paralelos" são aparentes em uma comparação de A View of the Hebrews e do Livro de Mórmon?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: What "non-parallels" are apparent in a comparison of View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?
|category=
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: What "non-parallels" are apparent in a comparison of View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?==
===There are many elements of Ethan Smith's book which would have provided a rich source of material for Joseph Smith, but he didn't use them===

Critics generally ignore the presence of many "unparallels"—these are elements of Ethan Smith's book which would have provided a rich source of material for Joseph to use in order to persuade his contemporaries that the Book of Mormon was an ancient history of the American Indians, and that they were descended from Israel. Yet, the Book of Mormon consistently ignores such supposed "bulls-eyes," which is good news for proponents of the Book of Mormon's authenticity, since virtually all of Ethan's "evidences" have been judged to be false or misleading. The lack of such parallels is bad news, however, for anyone wanting to claim that Joseph got his inspiration or information from Ethan Smith. Some examples follow:

{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="20%"|Hebrew Evidence
!width="80%"|''View of the Hebrews'' claim (not present in Book of Mormon)
|-
|
===No revelation?===
||
* "We are to expect no new revelation from heaven. And the days of miracles are thought to be past" (127).
* ''View of the Hebrews'' denies new revelation or miracles. The Book of Mormon was emphatically a new revelation, and it insists that miracles continue today ({{s||Mormon|9|7-20}}).
|-
|

===Ark of the covenant===
||
* "The Indians have had their imitation of the ark of the covenant in ancient Israel" (68).
* "we have an account that the Shawano Indians in an excursion captured the Indian warrior called Old Scranny, of the Muskhoge tribe, and condemned him to a fiery torture. He told them the occasion of his falling into their hands was, he had forfeited the protection of the Divine Power by some impurity or other, when carrying the holy ark of war against his devoted enemy" (121).
*The Book of Mormon never mentions the ark of the covenant, or anything like it. (The only reference to "ark" is to Noah's ark—{{s||Ether|6|7}}.)
|-
|

=== Circumcision ===
||
* "The American Indians have practised circumcision" (69).
* The pre-Christian Book of Mormon peoples never mention circumcision, much less emphasize it as a vital rite ({{s||Moroni|8|8}} notes its passing).
* Why did not Joseph emphasize this supposed parallel with the Amerindians?
|-
|
=== Fire god conflated with Israel's god ===
||
* ""The Indians have had much of an apprehension that their one Great Spirit had a great affinity to fire. And the Peruvians, it seems, went so far as to embody him in the sun. Here seems a shred of mixture of the Persian idolatry, with the theocracy of Israel. As the more ancient Israelites caught a degree of the idolatrous distemper of Egypt, as appears in their golden calf; so the ten tribes, the time they resided in Media, and before they set off for America, may have blended some idea of fire with their one God" (72).
* The Book of Mormon never mentions fire or sun worship, despite it being a known part of pre-Columbian religion.
|-
|
=== Indians used Hebrew terms===
||
* "In their sacred dances, these authors assure us the Indians sing "Halleluyah Yohewah;"—praise to Jah Jehovah. When they return victorious from their wars, they sing, Yo-he-wah; having been by tradition taught to ascribe the praise to God.

:"The same authors assure us, the Indians make great use of initials of the mysterious name of God, like the tetragrammaton of the ancient Hebrews; or the four radical letters which form the name of Jehovah; as the Indians pronounce thus, Y-O-He-wah. That like the ancient Hebrews, they are cautious of mentioning these together, or at once. They sing and repeat the syllables of this name in their sacred dances thus; Yo-yo, or ho-ho-he-he-wah-wah. Mr. Adair upon the same, says; "After this they begin again; Hal-hal-le-le-lu-lu-yahyah. And frequently the whole train strike up, hallelu-halleluhalleluyah- halleluyah." They frequently sing the name of Shilu (Shilo, Christ) with the syllables of the name of God added; thus, "Shilu-yo-Shilu-yo-Shilu-he-Shilu-he-Shilu-wah-Shilu-wah." Thus adding to the name of Shilu, the name of Jehovah by its sacred syllables. Things like these have been found among Indians of different regions of America" (72).
:"He says the general name of all their priestly [113] order is Ishtoallo. And the name of the high priest's waiter is Sagan. Mr. Faber (remarking upon this) thinks the former word is a corruption of Ish-da-eloah, a man of God; see original of 2 Kings, iv. 21,22, 25, 27, 40, and other places. And of the latter word he says, "Sagan is the very name by which the Hebrews called the deputy of the high priest, who supplied his office, and who performed the functions of it in the absence of the high priest. See Calmet's Dict, vox Sagan.'"

:"Here then is evidence to our purpose, that those Indians should call their order of priests, and the high priest's waiter, by those ancient Hebrew names of a man of God, and a deputy of the high priest. How could these events have occurred, had not those natives been Hebrew, and brought down these names by Hebrew tradition?" (112–113)

* The Book of Mormon never mentions the use of such terms as "Shilo[h]" or "Hallelujah." It gives no names of priests or priestly orders.
* The name "Jehovah" is only used in the last verse of the Book of Mormon, and in a citation from Isaiah.
|-
|

=== Language affinities ===
||
* Ethan Smith claimed that a number of Indian words were evidence that their language was connected with Hebrew. The Book of Mormon relies on nothing like this.
* Click [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/View_of_the_Hebrews/Chapter_3_(pages_45-64) here] (bottom) and [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/View_of_the_Hebrews/Chapter_3_(pages_65-84) here] (top) to see the language lists.
|-
|

=== Tribal totems===
||
* VoH claims that the Amerindian tribes use animal emblems which recall Jacob's blessing to his twelve sons:

:The Indians being in tribes, with their heads and names of tribes, affords further light upon this subject. The Hebrews not only had their tribes, and heads of tribes, as have the Indians; but they had their animal emblems of their tribes. Dan's emblem was a serpent; Issachar's an ass; Benjamin's a wolf; and Judah's a lion. And this trait of character is not wanting among the natives of this land. They have their wolf tribe; their tiger tribe; panther tribe; buffalo tribe; bear tribe; deer tribe; raccoon tribe; eagle tribe; and many others. What other nation on earth bears any resemblance to this? Here, no doubt, is Hebrew tradition.

:Various of the emblems given in Jacob's last blessing, have been strikingly fulfilled in the American Indians. "Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that the rider shall fall backwards. Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf; in the morning he shall devour the prey; and at night he shall divide the spoil" [Gen 49:17, 27]. Had the prophetic eye rested on the American aborigines, it seems as though no picture could have been more accurate" (81, italics removed).

* The Book of Mormon makes no mention of Jacob's prophecy, such tribal characteristics, or totem or tribal signs of this type. Yet another dramatic evidence, well-known to Americans on the frontier, was ignored.
|-
|

=== Cities of refuge===
||
* "Their having an imitation of the ancient city of refuge, evinces the truth of our subject" (81).
* No cities of refuge are described in the Book of Mormon, nor does Nephite law mention the right of refuge.
|-
|

=== Passover ===
||
* "The Hebrews were commanded to eat their passover with bitter herbs; Exod. xii. 8. The Indians have a notable custom of purifying themselves with bitter herbs and roots. Describing one of their feasts, the writer says, "At the end of the notable dance, the old beloved women return home to hasten the feast. In the mean time every one at the temple drinks plentifully of the Cussena, and other bitter liquids, to cleanse their sinful bodies, as they suppose" (88).
* The Book of Mormon never uses the term "Passover," or describes the passover meal.
|-
|

=== High Priest and garments===
||
* "The Indian high priest makes his yearly atonement for sin. He appears at their temple, (such as it is) arrayed in his white deer skin garments, seeming to answer to the ancient ephod" (89).
* "Here, as in Mr. Adair's account, is their high priest's robe and breast plate. On ordinary occasions, they retire secretly (Mr. H. adds) to their sacred places, and invoke the assistance of the Great Spirit, and make the most solemn vows to him, which they never fail to perform, should events correspond to their prayers. But at times more momentous, such as the declaration of war, conclusion of peace, or the prevalence of epidemics, &c. they impose on themselves long fastings, and severe penance, take narcotics and nauseating drugs" (125).
* The Book of Mormon says nothing of Nephite priesthood's dress, and does not discuss the day of atonement rituals. Any Nephite teaching is focused on Christ as redeemer (e.g., {{s||Mosiah|2-5|}}), not the use of a mortal high priest as intermediary.
* The term "ephod" is never mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and there is no mention of narcotics or nauseating drugs.
|-
|

=== Indian Ritual = Hebrew ===
||
* "Mr. Adair describes the Indian feasts, and speaks of them as bearing a very near resemblance of the stated feasts in ancient Israel. He gives accounts that when the Indians are about to engage in war, they have their preparatory sacrifices, purifications, and fastings. He speaks of their daily sacrifice, their ablutions, marriages, divorces, burials, mournings for the dead, separations of women, and punishment of various crimes, as being in his opinion manifestly of Hebrew origin" (90).
* The Book of Mormon never mentions feasts, preparations for war, ritual purification, washings, marriage forms, divorce forms, or separation of women.
|-
|
=== War preparations ===
||
* "The purifications, fasting, abstinences, and prayers, to prepare for war, appear to be Hebrew. Adair says; "Before the Indians go to war, they have many preparatory ceremonies of purification and fasting, like what is recorded of the Israelites. When the leader begins to beat up for volunteers, he goes three times round his dark winter house, contrary to the course of the sun, sounding the war-whoop, [90] singing the war song, and beating a drum.* He addresses the crowd, who come about him, and after much ceremony, he proceeds to whoop again for the warriors to come and join him, and sanctify themselves for success against the common enemy, according to their ancient religious law. A number soon join him in his winter house, where they live separate from all others, and purify themselves for the space of three days and three nights, exclusive of the first broken day. On each day they observe a strict fast till sunset, watching the young men very narrowly (who have not been initiated in war titles) lest unusual hunger should tempt them to violate it, to the supposed danger of all their lives in the war, by destroying the power of their purifying, beloved physic, which they drink plentifully during that time. They are such strict observers of their law of purification, and think it so essential in obtaining health and success in war, as not to allow the best beloved trader that ever lived among them, knowingly, to enter the beloved ground appropriated to the duty of being sanctified for war, much less to associate with the camp in the woods, at such a time, though he is united with them in the same war design. They oblige him to walk and encamp separately by himself, as an impure, dangerous animal, till the leader hath purified him, according to the usual time and method, with the consecrated things of the ark" (90).
* This vivid material would have resonated deeply with nineteenth century Americans, who were either fascinated or fearful of warlike Amerindians. Yet, no such dramatic or picturesque material graces the Book of Mormon accounts of war—its descriptions are pedestrian, describing only the making of weapons, or the preparations of supplies. The Book of Mormon view of warfare is pragmatic, not romantic or exotic.
|-
|

=== Burial rites ===
||
* "The Indians, when one dies, wash and anoint the body. The Hebrews did the same" (92).
* Burial rites are rarely described in the Book of Mormon (see {{s||Alma|19|43}}, {{s||Alma|20|1-5}}). Generally all we are told is that the dead were buried ({{s||Alma|3|1}}, {{s||Alma|30|1-2}}, {{s||Alma|53|1-3}}) or (on rare occasions) cast into a river because of the number of the dead ({{s||Alma|44|21-22}}).
* No discussion of washing or anointing the body of the dead appears.
|-
|
=== Widowhood laws===
||
* "A widow among them is bound by a strict Indian custom, to mourn the death of her husband for three years or more, unless the brother of her deceased husband wishes to take her. In that case, she is released from this law, as soon as it is known that the brother makes love to her. She may then throw off her [93] mourning habits, and dress and paint like others. Certainly this appears to have originated in that Mosaic law" (92–93).
* No laws or regulations are discussed in the matter of widows. The one widow discussed deviates from the pattern which Ethan Smith assures us is a clear sign of Hebrew behavior ({{s||Alma|47|32-35}})—another lost opportunity for Joseph's forgery!
|-
|
=== Medicine bag ===
||
* "This tribe of Chippeways, (Mr. Herman informs,) call their sacred sack, their "medicine bag." The contents appear to be essentially the same, and for the same end, with the contents of the sacred ark in other tribes" (105).
* No medicine bag or parallel to the ark of the covenant is discussed in the Book of Mormon.
|-
|
=== Kosher===
||
* "Eagles of every kind they esteem unclean food; likewise ravens, crows, bats, buzzards, swallows, and every species of owl." This he considers as precisely Hebrew; as also their purifications of their priests; and purification for having touched a dead body, or any other unclean thing" (114).
* The Book of Mormon never mentions ''kosher'' laws, or describes the animals to be avoided.
|-
|

=== Architecture===
||
* Extensive descriptions of pyramids are given as impressive evidence (136, 154–156).
* Geometry in architecture is stressed: "They have left us perfect specimens of circles, squares, octagons, and parallel lines, on a grand and noble scale" (144, see also 147).
* The Book of Mormon ignores geometry, and does not indulge in descriptions of buildings intended to impress or awe the audience.
|-
|

=== Phylacteries===
||
* Wherever they went then, they would have these phylacteries with them. If they brought them to this country, they would keep them with diligence. They would most naturally become some of the most precious contents in their holy ark, as their nation formerly kept the holy law in the ark. Here such a phylactery would be safe through ever so many centuries. This is so far from being improbable, that it is almost a ''moral certainty''" {{io}} (172).
* Once again, Joseph Smith ignores a supposed "home run" bit of evidence—there are no phylacteries in the Book of Mormon.
|-
|

=== Quetzalcoatl ===
||
* View of the Hebrews associates Quetzalcoatl with Moses and discusses this figure at length (156–160).
* The Book of Mormon makes no mention of Quetzalcoatl, even though later Latter-day Saints would find the legends compelling descriptions of Christ. Once again, however, Joseph Smith ignores the rich vein of material that Ethan Smith provided.
|-
|
|}
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}

[[pt:Pergunta: O "não-paralelos" são aparentes em uma comparação de A View of the Hebrews e do Livro de Mórmon?]]

Question: Could Joseph Smith have used Ethan Smith's ''View of the Hebrews'' as a guideline for creating the Book of Mormon?

2017-06-06T20:47:24Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Joseph Smith poderia ter usado a obra View of the Hebrews de Ethan Smith como fonte para a criação do Livro de Mórmon?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Could Joseph Smith have used Ethan Smith's ''View of the Hebrews'' as a guideline for creating the Book of Mormon?
|category=Book of Mormon/Authorship theories/View of the Hebrews
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Could Joseph Smith have used Ethan Smith's ''View of the Hebrews'' as a guideline for creating the Book of Mormon?==
===Criticisms related to ''View of the Hebrews'' and the Book of Mormon===

*It is claimed that a 19th century work by Ethan Smith, ''View of the Hebrews'', provided source material for Joseph Smith's construction of the Book of Mormon.
*Some also postulate a link between Ethan Smith and Oliver Cowdery, since both men lived in Poultney, Vermont while Smith served as the pastor of the church that Oliver Cowdery's family attended at the time that ''View of the Hebrews'' was being written.

===Many of the criticisms proposed are based upon B. H. Roberts' list of parallels, which only had validity if one applied a hemispheric geography model to the Book of Mormon===

The ''View of the Hebrews'' theory is yet another attempt to fit a secular origin to the Book of Mormon. Many of the criticisms proposed are based upon B. H. Roberts' list of parallels, which only had validity if one applied a hemispheric geography model to the Book of Mormon. There are a significant number of differences between the two books, which are easily discovered upon reading Ethan Smith's work. Many points that Ethan Smith thought were important are not mentioned at all in the Book of Mormon, and many of the "parallels" are no longer valid based upon current scholarship.<ref>{{Reexploring |author=John W. Welch|article=[http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=71&chapid=788 View of the Hebrews: 'An Unparallel']
|start=83 | end=87}}</ref>

Advocates of the Ethan Smith theory must also explain why Joseph, the ostensible forger, had the chutzpah to point out the source of his forgery. They must also explain why, if Joseph found this evidence so compelling, he did not exploit it for use in the Book of Mormon text itself, since the Book of Mormon contains no reference to the many "unparallels" that Ethan assured his readers virtually guaranteed a Hebrew connection to the Amerindians.
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:An Insider's View of Mormon Origins]]
[[Category:Becoming Gods]]
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:No Man Knows My History]]
[[Category:One Nation Under Gods]]
[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Podría José Smith han utilizado Ethan Smith ''Vista de los Hebreos'' como una guía para la creación del Libro de Mormón?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Joseph Smith poderia ter usado a obra View of the Hebrews de Ethan Smith como fonte para a criação do Livro de Mórmon?]]

Question: How could the Garden of Eden have been in Missouri if the Flood was local?

2017-06-06T20:47:17Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: Como o Jardim do Éden pode ser localizado no Missouri se o dilúvio foi um evento local?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: How could the Garden of Eden have been in Missouri if the Flood was local?
|category=Flood of Noah
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: How could the Garden of Eden have been in Missouri if the Flood was local?==
===This question requires a lot of assumptions, and cannot be answered===
{{Main|Garden of Eden in Missouri?}}

A question related to the scope of the Flood that arises is how the Garden of Eden could possibly have been located in Missouri if Noah's flood was not global, since his posterity appeared in the Old World. If one were making assumptions about a localized flood in Noah's day, one would have to assume that the flood originated wherever Noah was, and that for as long as the ark drifted, extended at least as far as Noah could see. It would be difficult to know where Noah was before the flood, but the length of Noah's journey could be quite far based upon storm conditions and the time afloat.

One "limited flood" explanation that has been proposed for this is that Noah built his ark and either went down the Mississippi River valley, or that he built the ark on the East Coast of the North American continent. Another line of thought is that the placement of the Garden on the North American continent was more of a symbolic act intended to "sacralize" the land—thus providing it with its own "sacred history" similar to that of the Old World. The truth is, however, that the Biblical description of the location of the Garden of Eden does ''not'' match up with existing Old World geography, any more than it does with New World geography. <ref>Kevin Barney, [http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2007/07/was-the-garden-of-eden-really-in-missouri Was the Garden of Eden Really in Missouri?], ''By Common Consent'', July 4, 2007.</ref> (For a more in-depth treatment of this subject, see Kevin Barney, [http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2007/07/was-the-garden-of-eden-really-in-missouri Was the Garden of Eden Really in Missouri?] and the wiki article [[Garden of Eden in Missouri?]]).
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Cómo podría el Jardín del Edén haber estado en Missouri si el diluvio fue local?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Como o Jardim do Éden pode ser localizado no Missouri se o dilúvio foi um evento local?]]

Question: Doesn't the Bible say that the continents were divided immediately after the Flood?

2017-06-06T20:47:14Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Pergunta: A Bíblia não diz que os continentes foram divididos imediatamente após o Dilúvio?

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Doesn't the Bible say that the continents were divided immediately after the Flood?
|category=Flood of Noah
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Doesn't the Bible say that the continents were divided immediately after the Flood?==
===At least a few leaders of the Church have been of this view that the continents were divided during or after the Flood===

Prominently, prior to becoming president of the Church, Joseph Fielding Smith wrote that

<blockquote>
in the beginning all of the land surface was in one place as it was in the days of Peleg, ({{b||Genesis|10|25}}.) that the earth was divided. Some Bible commentators have concluded that this division was one concerning the migrations of the inhabitants of the earth between them, but this is not the case. While this is but a very brief statement, yet it speaks of a most important event. The dividing of the earth was not an act of division by the inhabitants of the earth by tribes and peoples, but a breaking asunder of the continents, thus dividing the land surface and creating the Eastern Hemisphere and Western Hemisphere. <ref>{{AnswersGospelQuestions1|vol=5|start=73}}</ref>
</blockquote>

John Taylor also expressed similar views, albeit more briefly. <ref>John Taylor, ''Government of God'' (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1852), 110.{{link|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=VCdOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=government+of+god&hl=en&ei=aoMkToDEDML-sQL2oOXgAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false}}</ref> It is perhaps important to note that then-Elder Smith wrote that "By looking at a wall map of the world, you will discover how the land surface along the northern and southern coast of the American Hemisphere and Europe and Africa has the appearance of having been together at one time." <ref>{{AnswersGospelQuestions1|vol=5|start=73}} For essentially the same argument, see also 4:22; ''Church History and Modern Revelation'' (1947), 2:35; and ''Man: His Origin and Destiny'' (1954), 385, 421–422. Note that these sources are all even earlier, and likewise predate modern continental drift data and theory. President David O. McKay was clear on multiple occasions that the latter volume represented only President Smith's personal opinions, and were not Church doctrine (see [[Primary_sources/Evolution/David_O_McKay_1957|here]] and [[Primary_sources/Evolution/McKay_Letter_1959|here]]).</ref> Elder Smith was writing between 1953 and 1966; modern continental drift theory was only beginning to gain acceptance during this period (even by 1977, a geology textbook would note that "a poll of geologists now would probably show a substantial majority who favor the idea of drift," while also providing a substantial critique of the theory. <ref>Richard A. Davis, ''Principles of Oceanography'', 2nd edition, (Addison-Wesley, 1977), ISBN 0201014645. For more on continental drift theory's history and development, see ''wikipedia.org'' {{link|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_drift}}.</ref>

It is difficult to know, then, if Elder Smith would have revised his view of the implication that continents "fit," jigsaw-puzzle-like, into each other had he been aware of some of the later evidence. He was certainly humble enough to renounce other views which he had expressed which contradicted later scientific advances.

===Scriptures that refer to the earth being "divided" refer to groups of ''people'' being separated===

A few scriptures, then, refer to the earth being ''divided'':

:{{b||Genesis|10|25}} and {{b|1|Chronicles|1|19}}: And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother’s name was Joktan.

:{{s||D&C|133|24}}: And the land of Jerusalem and the land of Zion shall be turned back into their own place, and the earth shall be like as it was in the days before it was divided.

===There is no serious biblical scholarship that reads these verses as implying a rapid drift of the continents===

The verses in Genesis and 1 Chronicles are describing the descendants of Shem. LDS scholar Hugh Nibley viewed Genesis 10:25 (which says that in the days of Peleg "the earth was divided") as meaning "the earth was divided among the children of Noah." There is no serious biblical scholarship that reads these verses as implying a rapid drift of the continents—partly because such an idea would have been utterly foreign to writers in that time period. Some members have preferred to take the reading of Elder Smith as described above.

Note that a belief that the continents were ''physically'' divided during the flood contradicts the belief that the Garden of Eden was on the Western continent, since there would have been no "Western hemisphere" prior to the Flood. At best one would have to say that the Garden of Eden was on the same continent that the modern Middle East is on, but that it was a little further west than believed by traditional fundamentalist Christians.

{{SeeAlso|Mormonism and the Bible/Peleg|l1=Peleg}}
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]

[[es:Pregunta: ¿Dice la Biblia que los continentes se dividieron inmediatamente después del Diluvio?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: A Bíblia não diz que os continentes foram divididos imediatamente após o Dilúvio?]]

Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians

2017-06-06T20:47:04Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Lamanitas/Relação com os polinésios

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians
|subject=Relationship to Polynesians
|summary=
|sublink1=Polynesians as descendants of the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon
|sublink2=Statements from Church leaders about Polynesian origins/identity
}}
{{:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians/Are they descendants}}
{{:Book_of_Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians/Statements}}
</onlyinclude>



[[es:El Libro de Mormón/Lamanitas/Relación con los Polinesios]]
[[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Lamanitas/Relação com os polinésios]]

Geographical issues related to DNA and the Book of Mormon

2017-06-06T20:47:02Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Evidências de DNA/Questões de geografia

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Book of Mormon/DNA evidence/Geography issues
|subject=Geographical issues related to DNA and the Book of Mormon
|summary=
|sublink1=Question: What are the geographical assumptions upon which DNA-based attacks on the Book of Mormon are based?
|sublink2=Question: Is DNA Haplogroup X2a proof that the Book of Mormon fits best in a geography located in the Great Lakes region?
|sublink3=Gospel Topics: "These events may severely reduce or totally eliminate certain genetic profiles"
|sublink4=Question: What effect did the 90% death rate in the New World after European contact have on genetics and its relationship to the Book of Mormon?
|sublink5=Question: What influence might the Jaredites have had on New World DNA?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: What are the geographical assumptions upon which DNA-based attacks on the Book of Mormon are based?}}
{{:Question: Is DNA Haplogroup X2a proof that the Book of Mormon fits best in a geography located in the Great Lakes region?}}
{{:Source:Book of Mormon and DNA Studies:Gospel Topics:These events may severely reduce or totally eliminate certain genetic profiles}}
{{:Question: What effect did the 90% death rate in the New World after European contact have on genetics and its relationship to the Book of Mormon?}}
{{:Question: What influence might the Jaredites have had on New World DNA?}}


[[de:Das Buch Mormon/DNS-Beweise/Erdkunde]]
[[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Evidências de DNA/Questões de geografia]]

Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?

2017-06-06T20:46:53Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Anacronismos/Língua/Palavras gregas

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?
|category=Book of Mormon
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Is the Book of Mormon not an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" such as "alpha and omega" or "Christ"?==
===The words "alpha and omega" or "Christ" are as unlikely to be on the plates as the English word "sword" or "house"—these are ''translations.''===

The Book of Mormon claims to be a ''translation.'' Therefore, the language used is that of Joseph Smith. Joseph could choose to render similar (or identical) material using King James Bible language if that adequately represented the text's intent.

The words "alpha and omega" are as unlikely to be on the plates as the English word "sword" or "house"—these are ''translations.''

All "alpha and omega" tells us is that there was some expression on the plates similar to "from A to Z," or "from first to last."

The word "Christ" is a Greek translation of the Hebrew messiah, which means “the anointed one.” The word "Christ" was used by the translator, Joseph Smith, to describe the messiah.

Only if we presume that the Book of Mormon is a fraud at the outset is this proof of anything. If we assume that it is a translation, then the use of Bible language tells us merely that Joseph used biblical language.

This unconvincing complaint is similar to another anti-Mormon favorite, the issue of the [[Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms/"Adieu"_in_the_Book_of_Mormon|"French word" ''adieu'']] in the Book of Mormon.

</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Anacronismos/Língua/Palavras gregas]]

The Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2017-06-06T20:46:48Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Abraão/Documentos Egípcios Kirtland

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Book of Abraham/Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|heading=The Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|summary=Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes.
|sublink1=Background and provenance of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|sublink2=Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers
}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Kirtland Egyptian Papers/Background}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Kirtland Egyptian Papers/Purpose}}
</onlyinclude>

{{Videos label}}
<videoflash>gfqFGB4DBHQ</videoflash>

[[Category:Book of Abraham]]

[[de:Buch Abraham/Kirtland Egyptian Papers]]
[[es:El Libro de Abraham/Papeles egipcios de Kirtland]]
[[pt:O Livro de Abraão/Documentos Egípcios Kirtland]]

Question: Was the content of Alma Chapter 40 derived from a Presbyterian document called ''The Westminster Confession''?

2017-06-06T20:46:45Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Acusações de Plágio/A Confissão de Westminster

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Was the content of Alma Chapter 40 derived from a Presbyterian document called ''The Westminster Confession''?
|category=Book of Mormon/Plagiarism accusations
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Was the content of Alma Chapter 40 derived from a Presbyterian document called ''The Westminster Confession''?==
===If Joseph were attempting to plagiarize ''The Westminster Confession'', he ought to have taken the easier route of duplicating entire sentences or even paragraphs in the manner that the critics accuse him of doing with passages from Isaiah===

When one considers the [[Book of Mormon translation chronology|short amount of time]] in which production of the Book of Mormon was completed, it is not reasonable to believe that such detailed and difficult method of generating text was a factor in the process even if one does ''not'' believe in the book's divine origin. If Joseph were attempting to plagiarize ''The Westminster Confession'', he ought to have taken the easier route of duplicating entire sentences or even paragraphs in the manner that the critics accuse him of doing with passages from Isaiah. Why would Joseph “plagiarize” a well known source such as the Bible so precisely, yet go through a potentially slow and difficult process of extracting phrases and ideas from a lesser known source in order to produce a few verses in a single book in the Book of Mormon?

Critics can always find “source material” for the Book of Mormon if they extract small enough phrases from their alleged source documents. Since both the Book of Mormon and The Westminster Confessional are religious documents, it is not unreasonable to expect similar words and phrases.

===The critics would have us believe that Joseph Smith read the first two verses in Chapter 32 of The Westminster Confession, and then produced Alma 40:11, 13, 14 and 20===

*[http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of_faith.html THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH (1646)] (Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics)
*[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Westminster_Confession THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH (1646)] (Wikisource)

The critics would have us believe that Joseph Smith read the first two verses in Chapter 32 of The Westminster Confession, and then produced Alma 40:11, 13, 14 and 20. In addition to the verses shown, it is indicated by the critics that there is much additional material that shows a relationship between the two texts. The following is a comparison of the verses shown in Alma 40 and The Westminster Confession, Chapter 32:1-2 as they are presented and arranged by the critics:

{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="50%"|Alma 40:11, 12, 13, 14 and 20
!width="50%"|The Westminster Confession Chapter 32 Verses 1-2
|-
|"... the state of the soul between death and the resurrection..." (Book of Mormon, Alma 40:11)
||"... the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection..." (The Westminster Confession, chap. 32, Title)
|-
|"... the spirits ... are taken home to that God who gave them life" (Alma 40:11)
||"... their souls ...return to God who gave them" (Westminster Confession 32:1)
|-
|"... the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness,..." (Alma 40:12)
||"... The souls of the righteous, ...are received into the highest heavens, ..." (Westminster Confession 32:1)
|-
|"... the spirits of the wicked, ... shall be cast out into outer darkness;..." (Alma 40:13)
||"... the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, ...and utter darkness,..." (Westminster Confession 32:1)
|-
|"... the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, remain in this state, ...until the time of their resurrection" (Alma 40:14)
||"... the souls of the wicked.... remain in.... darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day" (Westminster Confession 32:2)
|-
|"... the souls and the bodies are re-united,..." (Alma 40:20)
||"... bodies ...shall be united again to their souls..." (Westminster Confessions 32:2)
|}

Notice the careful and extensive use of ellipses in order to string together various short phrases from the two sources in order to force a similarity. When arranged in this manner, the "similarities" look obvious. However, by examining the full text of the verses from both Alma 40 and The Westminster Confession Chapter 32, we see a much more convoluted comparison (Phrases which are claimed to be similar between the two texts are highlighted in bold).

{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="50%"|Alma 40:11, 12, 13, 14 and 20
!width="50%"|The Westminster Confession Chapter 32 Verses 1-2
|-
|11 Now, concerning '''the state of the soul between death and the resurrection'''—Behold, it has been made known unto me by an angel, that '''the spirits''' of all men, as soon as they are departed from this mortal body, yea, the spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, '''are taken home to that God who gave them life'''. (Alma 40:11)

12 And then shall it come to pass, that '''the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness''', which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow.

13 And then shall it come to pass, that '''the spirits of the wicked''', yea, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these '''shall be cast out into outer darkness'''; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil.

14 Now this is the state of '''the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness''', and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they '''remain in this state''', as well as the righteous in paradise, '''until the time of their resurrection'''.

15-19...

20 Now, my son, I do not say that their resurrection cometh at the resurrection of Christ; but behold, I give it as my opinion, that '''the souls and the bodies are reunited''', of the righteous, at the resurrection of Christ, and his ascension into heaven.
||
CHAPTER XXXII. Of '''the State of Man After Death, and of the Resurrection''' of the Dead.

I. The bodies of men, after death, return to dust, and see corruption; but '''their souls''' (which neither die nor sleep), having an immortal subsistence, immediately '''return to God who gave them'''. '''The souls of the righteous''', being then made perfect in holiness, '''are received into the highest heavens''', where they behold the face of God in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and '''the souls of the wicked are cast into hell''', where they remain in torments '''and utter darkness''', '''reserved to the judgment of the great day'''. Besides these two places for souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.

II. At the last day, such as are found alive shall not die, but be changed: and all the dead shall be raised up with the self-same bodies, and none other, although with different qualities, which '''shall be united again to their souls''' forever.
"
|}

===This tortured comparison represents only ''five'' verses across a span of ''ten'' verses in a single chapter in Alma against ''two'' verses in The Westminster Confession===

It is difficult to believe or accept the convoluted process that Joseph Smith would have had to go through in order to produce completely coherent text in Alma 40 verses 11-20 while selectively stealing ideas and phrases from the verses highlighted in The Westminster Confession. Furthermore, one should not be surprised to see words such as "soul," "spirit," "wicked," "resurrection," and "mortal" used in two different religious texts.

One short phrase which could be claimed to have been copied verbatim into the Book of Mormon from the Westminster Confession in the verses shown above: "God who gave." However, the same claim could be made that this phrase was copied from Ecclesiastes 12:7:

<blockquote>
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto '''God who gave''' it. ({{b||Ecclesiastes|12|7}}) {{ea}}
</blockquote>

To make a comparison at this level of sentence breakdown becomes an exercise in absurdity.
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}
[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Acusações de Plágio/A Confissão de Westminster]]

Book of Mormon/Plagiarism accusations/Joseph Smith, Sr.'s dream and Lehi's vision

2017-06-06T20:46:44Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Acusações de Plágio/O sonho de Joseph Smith, Sr. e visão de Lehi

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Book of Mormon/Plagiarism accusations/Joseph Smith, Sr.'s dream and Lehi's vision
|subject=Joseph Smith, Sr.'s dream and Lehi's vision
|summary=Critics point to similarities between a dream Joseph Smith's father had and Lehi's dream of the tree of life as evidence that Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon based on his own experiences.
|sublink1=Question: Did Joseph Smith incorporate his father's dream of the tree of life into the Book of Mormon?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith incorporate his father's dream of the tree of life into the Book of Mormon?}}
{{endnotes sources}}


[[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Acusações de Plágio/O sonho de Joseph Smith, Sr. e visão de Lehi]]

Mormonism and doctrine/Beliefs

2017-06-06T20:46:29Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Mormonismo e Doutrina/Crenças

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Mormonism and doctrine/Beliefs
|heading=Mormon views of various beliefs
|summary=
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Mormonism and doctrine/Rapture and LDS theology
|subject=Rapture and LDS theology
|summary=What is the "Rapture"? Do Latter-day Saints believe in this or a similar doctrine?
|sublink1=Question: Do Mormons believe in the "rapture"?
}}

{{:Mormonism and polygamy/The Law of Adoption}}
</onlyinclude>
{{CriticalSources}}
{{endnotes sources}}


[[es:El Mormonismo y la doctrina/Creencias]]
[[pt:Mormonismo e Doutrina/Crenças]]

Racial issues and the Church of Jesus Christ/Blacks and the priesthood/The "curse of Cain" and "curse of Ham"

2017-06-06T20:46:27Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Mormonismo e Assuntos Raciais/Negros e do sacerdócio/A "maldição de Caim" e "maldição de Cam"

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Mormonism and racial issues/Blacks and the priesthood/The "curse of Cain" and "curse of Ham"
|subject=Mormonism and the "curse of Cain"
|sublink1=Gospel Topics: "Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else"
|sublink2=Gospel Topics: "Even after 1852, at least two black Mormons continued to hold the priesthood"
|sublink3=Question: What are the "curse of Cain" and the "curse of Ham"?
|sublink4=Question: When did a biblical curse become associated with the "Hamites?"
|sublink5=Question: When did the "mark of Cain" become associated with black skin?
|sublink6=Question: How did the "curse of Ham" or "curse of Cain" become associated with Mormonism?
|sublink7=Question: Is interracial marriage prohibited or condemned within the Church?
|sublink8=Question: Do the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Source:Gospel Topics:Race and the Priesthood:2013:Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor}}
{{:Source:Gospel Topics:Race and the Priesthood:Even after 1852, at least two black Mormons continued to hold the priesthood}}
{{:Question: What are the "curse of Cain" and the "curse of Ham"?}}
{{:Question: When did a biblical curse become associated with the "Hamites?"}}
{{:Question: When did the "mark of Cain" become associated with black skin?}}
{{:Question: How did the "curse of Ham" or "curse of Cain" become associated with Mormonism?}}
{{:Question: Is interracial marriage prohibited or condemned within the Church?}}
{{:Question: Do the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence?}}
(''For further discussion see:'' [[Fallibility_of_prophets|Official Church doctrine and statements by Church leaders]].)
{{CriticalSources}}
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:MormonThink]]

[[de:Schwarze und das Priestertum/Der Fluch Kains und der Fluch Hams]]
[[pt:Mormonismo e Assuntos Raciais/Negros e do sacerdócio/A "maldição de Caim" e "maldição de Cam"]]

Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision

2017-06-06T20:46:18Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Fontes Primárias/Joseph Smith, Jr./Relatos da Primeira Visão

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts
|heading=Primary sources related to Joseph Smith's First Vision
|summary=Original text of Joseph's accounts of the First Vision
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1832
|subject=1832 account
|summary=This is the earliest known account of the First Vision written by Joseph Smith. Source: Joseph Smith Letterbook 1, pp. 1-6. Published in: Dean Jessee, ''Personal Writings of Joseph Smith''.
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1835
|subject=1835 account
|summary=This account was written by Joseph Smith in his diary. Joseph described his vision to Robert Matthias, also known as "Joshua the Jewish minister". Joseph Smith Diary (1835–1836), original in Joseph Smith Collection, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah. Published in: Dean Jessee, ''Personal Writings of Joseph Smith''.
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1835 (Erastus Holmes account)
|subject=1835 (Erastus Holmes account)
|summary=Erastus Holmes account ''Deseret News'' 2.15 (May 29, 1852); also in ''Millennial Star'' 15. 27 (July 2, 1853): 424; Jessee, ''The Papers of Joseph Smith'', 2: 79-80; cf. {{Book:Vogel:EMD|Short|vol=1|pages=207}}; DHC 2. 312.
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1840 (Orson Pratt account)
|subject=1840 (Orson Pratt account)
|summary=
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1842 (Joseph Smith History of the Church)
|subject=1842 (Joseph Smith History of the Church)
|summary="Joseph Smith’s History of the Church," ''Times and Seasons'' 3. 10 (15 Mar. 1842): 726-28
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1842 Wentworth Letter account)
|subject=1842 (Wentworth letter account)
|summary=Wentworth letter. (''Times and Seasons'', 3.9 (1 Mar. 1842), p. 706-710
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1842 (Orson Hyde account)
|subject=1842 (Orson Hyde account)
|summary=
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1843 (The Pittsburgh Weekly Gazette account)
|subject=1843 (''The Pittsburgh Weekly Gazette'')
|summary=“The Prairies, Nauvoo, Joe Smith, the Temple, the Mormons, etc.,” editor, David Nye White, ''The Pittsburgh Weekly Gazette'' 58 (September 15, 1843): 3
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1843 (Levi Richards account)
|subject=1843 (Levi Richards account)
|summary=Levi Richards’s diary about Joseph Smith preaching in the summer of 1843 and repeating the Lord’s first message to him that no church was His (see {{Book:Ehat Cook:Words of Joseph Smith|pages=215}}
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1844 (Daniel Rupp account)
|subject=1844 (Daniel Rupp account)
|summary=: “Latter Day Saints, by Joseph Smith, Nauvoo, Illinois,” in I. Daniel Rupp, ''HE PASA EKKLESIA: An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States'' (Philadelphia: J. Y. Humphreys, 1844), pp. 404; The account for Rupp was published in the original history of the Church published in “History of Joseph Smith,” ''Millennial Star'' 22. 7 (February 18, 1860): 102-3; also in Dean Jesse, ''Papers of Joseph Smith'', 1:448.
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1844 (Alexander Neibaur account)
|subject=1844 (Alexander Neibaur account)
|summary=Alexander Neibaur Journal, 24 May 1844
}}
===== =====
{{SummaryItem
|link=Primary sources/Joseph Smith, Jr./First Vision accounts/1893 (Charles L. Walker account)
|subject=1893 (Charles L. Walker account)
|summary=As told by John Alger
}}
</onlyinclude>

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}



[[es:Fuentes primarias/José Smith/Cuentas Primera Visión]]
[[pt:Fontes Primárias/Joseph Smith, Jr./Relatos da Primeira Visão]]

Source:Gospel Topics:Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah:The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man to one woman is God’s standard, except at specific periods when He has declared otherwise

2017-06-06T20:46:14Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Fonte:Tópicos do Evangelho:O Casamento Plural e as Famílias Polígamas nos Primórdios de Utah:A Bíblia e o Livro de Mórmon ensinam que o casamento entre um homem e uma mulher é o padrão de Deus

{{FME-Source
|title=''Gospel Topics'': The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man to one woman is God’s standard, except at specific periods when He has declared otherwise
|category==
}}
<onlyinclude>
==''Gospel Topics'': The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man to one woman is God’s standard, except at specific periods when He has declared otherwise==
"Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah," ''Gospel Topics'' on LDS.org
<blockquote>
The Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man to one woman is God’s standard, except at specific periods when He has declared otherwise. <ref>[http://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng "Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah,"] ''Gospel Topics'' on LDS.org. (2013)</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}



[[pt:Fonte:Tópicos do Evangelho:O Casamento Plural e as Famílias Polígamas nos Primórdios de Utah:A Bíblia e o Livro de Mórmon ensinam que o casamento entre um homem e uma mulher é o padrão de Deus]]

Source:Gospel Topics:Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah:Latter-day Saints do not understand all of God’s purposes for instituting, through His prophets, the practice of plural marriage during the 19th century

2017-06-06T20:46:13Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Fonte:Tópicos do Evangelho:O Casamento Plural e as Famílias Polígamas nos Primórdios de Utah:Os santos dos últimos dias não entendem todos os propósitos de Deus para instituir

{{FME-Source
|title=''Gospel Topics'': Latter-day Saints do not understand all of God’s purposes for instituting, through His prophets, the practice of plural marriage during the 19th century
|category:
}}
<onlyinclude>
==''Gospel Topics'': Latter-day Saints do not understand all of God’s purposes for instituting, through His prophets, the practice of plural marriage during the 19th century==
"Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah," ''Gospel Topics'' on LDS.org:
<blockquote>
Latter-day Saints do not understand all of God’s purposes for instituting, through His prophets, the practice of plural marriage during the 19th century. The Book of Mormon identifies one reason for God to command it: to increase the number of children born in the gospel covenant in order to “raise up seed unto [the Lord]” (Jacob 2:30). Plural marriage did result in the birth of large numbers of children within faithful Latter-day Saint homes. It also shaped 19th-century Mormon society in other ways: marriage became available to virtually all who desired it; per-capita inequality of wealth was diminished as economically disadvantaged women married into more financially stable households; and ethnic intermarriages were increased, which helped to unite a diverse immigrant population. Plural marriage also helped create and strengthen a sense of cohesion and group identification among Latter-day Saints. Church members came to see themselves as a “peculiar people,” covenant-bound to carry out the commands of God despite outside opposition, willing to endure ostracism for their principles.<ref>[http://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng "Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah,"] ''Gospel Topics'' on LDS.org. (2013)</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}



[[pt:Fonte:Tópicos do Evangelho:O Casamento Plural e as Famílias Polígamas nos Primórdios de Utah:Os santos dos últimos dias não entendem todos os propósitos de Deus para instituir]]

Source:Matthias F. Cowley:Obedience:Talks on Doctrine:160-161:true obedience to the Lord's commands is an indication of moral courage

2017-06-06T20:46:09Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Fonte:Matthias F. Cowley:Obedience:Talks on Doctrine:160-161:A verdadeira obediência aos mandamentos do Senhor é uma indicação de coragem moral

{{FME-Source
|title=Cowley: "true obedience to the Lord's commands is an indication of moral courage"
|category=Gospel principles/Obedience
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Cowley: "true obedience to the Lord's commands is an indication of moral courage"==
Matthias F. Cowley:
<blockquote>
"To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." (I. Samuel xv: 22.) In an age of the world when independence is the proud boast of the nations, obedience is, by mistaken ideas of freedom, considered a mark of humiliation. To the reader I will say, in reality, true obedience to the Lord's commands is an indication of moral courage, union and power. It is not blind obedience that is referred to and maintained, but that type which characterized the ancient seers and saints, who, like the Messiah, were ready to say by word and deed, "I came not to do mine own will, but the will of my Father who sent me." The Latter-day Saints are credited with being obedient and submissive to authority, this fact being often used by their opponents as the occasion of reproach. Those who so use it surely must forget that God requires obedience; that the best embodiment of this principle, the most humble and yielding to the divine will, was the best and purest Being who ever dwelt in mortality, viz., the Lord Jesus Christ; He in whose mouth there was found no guile; who was perfect and without blemish in all the walks of life. While He was obedient to His Father's will and humble to the extreme, He was independent of the influence and persuasions of wicked men. The status of Latter-day Saints is conformable to this example. They are obedient to conscience, to convictions of right, to divine authority and to God, in whom they trust. While thus submissive, their persecutors have found them equally oblivious to the behests of wicked men, whether high or low. Men in the factories of the old world, working side by side at the weaver's loom, in the coal pit or elsewhere in following the various vocations of life—in this condition the Gospel preached by the elders of Israel has reached them. Alike, many of them have received convictions of the truth. They have said: "This is the truth; I must obey it or stand condemned." Other people have said: "It is true, but if I obey I will be ostracized, perhaps lose my employment and be an outcast from [p. 161] my father's house. Better that I reject the truth and live in peace, than take upon me this cross of obedience to unpopular truth." The courageous obey the Gospel, suffer persecution, prove themselves men, and will attain to eternal life. The other people referred to are slaves to their own fear of popular clamor and to the unseen powers of darkness which lead men to reject the plan of salvation. Of the first named class are the Latter-day Saints, a host of men and women who have left home, kindred and country for the Gospel's sake. They have endured persecution even unto death, privation and suffering in every form; have redeemed a desert and built up a commonwealth so fruitful with education, thrift and enterprise that any nation beneath the sun might well be proud of them. Their obedience and moral courage they bequeath to their posterity is a legacy better than diamonds or the honors and praise of a fallen world. They look back to their associates in early manhood who, for fear, rejected the truth, and find these, whether living or dead, in most cases unhonored and unknown. The obedience rendered by Latter-day Saints to the authority of the priesthood is not secured by virtue of any solemn obligation entered into by the adherent to obey the dictum of his superiors in office; but upon the nature of the Gospel, which guarantees to every adherent the companionship of the Holy Spirit, and this Spirit secures to every faithful individual a living testimony concerning the truth or falsity of every proposition presented for his consideration. "By one spirit have we access unto the Father." (Eph ii.) So that as all men and women who embrace the Gospel are entitled to an individual testimony of the truth, the same spirit guides into all truth reveals the things of the Father and imparts the inspiration essential to preserve mankind from a blind obedience to erroneous principles and false guides. The statement of the Savior, recorded in St. John vii: 17, covers the ground in the broadest light: "If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself." This secures to every true Saint, if he is faithful, protection against imposture, the abuse of power and the false decisions of man-made councils. In [p. 162] this particular the Church of Christ is distinguished from all other system and institutions. He has promised to guide and direct, and that He "doeth nothing, but He revealeth His secrets unto His servants, the prophets." (Amos iii: 7.) This does not imply the infallibility of man, but it does imply the promise that no man or council of men who stand at the head of the church shall have power to lead the Saints astray. With this assurance, then, the people of God in every dispensation have been justified in rendering absolute yet intelligent obedience in the direction of the holy prophets. It is an undeniable fact in the history of the Saints that obedience to whatever has come, either by written document or verbally, from the presidency of the church, has been attended with good results; on the other hand, whosoever has opposed such council, without repentance, has been followed with evidence of condemnation.<ref>Matthias F. Cowley, “Obedience," in ''Talks on Doctrine'', pp. 160–61.</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[es:Fuente:Matthias F. Cowley:Obedience:Talks on Doctrine:160-161:La verdadera obediencia a los mandamientos del Señor es una indicación de coraje moral]]
[[pt:Fonte:Matthias F. Cowley:Obedience:Talks on Doctrine:160-161:A verdadeira obediência aos mandamentos do Senhor é uma indicação de coragem moral]]

John Whitmer (1876): "I have never heard that any one of the three or eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they have borne to the Book as published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon"

2017-06-06T20:46:05Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Fonte:Echoes:Ch2:11:John Whitmer 1876:Eu nunca ouvi falar de que qualquer um dos três ou oito testemunhas jamais negou o testemunho

{{FME-Source
|title=John Whitmer (1876): "I have never heard that any one of the three or eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they have borne to the Book as published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon"
|category=
|catname=
}}<onlyinclude>
==John Whitmer (1876): "I have never heard that any one of the three or eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they have borne to the Book as published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon"==
In 1876, John Whitmer, one of the Eight Witnesses, wrote a lengthy letter to Mark Forscutt, which included the following:
<blockquote>
Oliver Cowdery lived in Richmond, Mo., some 40 miles from here, at the time of his death. I went to see him and was with him for some days previous to his demise. I have never heard him deny the truth of his testimony of the Book of Mormon under any circumstances whatever. . . . Neither do I believe that he would have denied, at the peril of his life; so firm was he that he could not be made to deny what he has affirmed to be a divine revelation from God. . . .

I have never heard that any one of the three or eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they have borne to the Book as published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon. There are only two of the witnesses to that book now living, to wit., David Whitmer, one of the three, and John Wh[itmer], one of the eight. Our names have gone forth to all nations, tongues and people as a divine revelation from God. And it will bring to pass the designs of God according to the declaration therein contained.<ref>{{Book:Parry Peterson Welch:Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon|pages=[http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1082&index=3 Chapter 2], {{sofr}}|author=Daniel C. Peterson|article=Not Joseph's, and Not Modern}}</ref>
</blockquote>

==John Whitmer's character==

<blockquote>
"Mr. [John] Whitmer is considered a truthful, honest and law abiding citizen by this community, and consequently, his appointment [to preach] drew out a large audience. Mr. Whitmer stated that he had often handled the identical ''golden plates'' which Mr. Smith received from the angel...."<ref>"I.C. Funn," [John Whitmer Testimony], ''Kingston'' (MO) ''Sentinel'', ca. January 1878, reprinted in ''Saints' Herald'' 25 (15 February 1878): 57; cited in {{EMD|vol=5|pages=245}}</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{Endnotes sources}}
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]

[[es:Fuente:Echoes:Ch2:11:John Whitmer 1876:Nunca he oído hablar de que cualquiera de los tres u ocho testigos nunca negó el testimonio]]
[[pt:Fonte:Echoes:Ch2:11:John Whitmer 1876:Eu nunca ouvi falar de que qualquer um dos três ou oito testemunhas jamais negou o testemunho]]

Apostasy/Reasons for

2017-06-06T20:45:43Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Apostasia

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Apostasy/Reasons for
|heading=Reasons why the apostasy occurred
|summary=
|sublink1=God permitted the apostasy to occur
|sublink2=Relationship of Mormonism to other branches of Christianity
}}
{{:Apostasy/Why did God allow it}}
{{:Apostasy/Relationship of the Church to other branches of Christianity}}
</onlyinclude>


[[de:Glaubensabfall/Gründe]]
[[es:Apostasía]]
[[pt:Apostasia]]

Apostasy/Why did God allow it

2017-06-06T20:45:42Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:Apostasia/Por que Deus permitiu que

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Apostasy/Why did God allow it
|subject=God permitted the apostasy to occur
|summary=If there were some people who would have accepted the Gospel as taught in Mormonism, why did God allow the earthly Church to pass from the earth?
|sublink1=Question: Why did God allow the Apostasy to occur?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Why did God allow the Apostasy to occur?}}
{{endnotes sources}}


[[es:Apostasía/Por qué permitió Dios que]]
[[pt:Apostasia/Por que Deus permitiu que]]

Moroni's visit/Moroni would have struck his head on the ceiling

2017-06-06T20:45:41Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Visita de Morôni/Moroni teria bateu a cabeça no teto

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Moroni's visit/Moroni would have struck his head on the ceiling
|subject=Moroni would have struck his head on the ceiling?
|summary=In one of the more absurd or desperate attacks upon Joseph's story, some claim that Moroni could not have stood "above the floor" because the ceiling would have been too low and he would have hit his head. Photos easily disprove this absurd claim.
|sublink1=Question: Would the angel Moroni have struck his head on the ceiling when he appeared to Joseph Smith in his room?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Would the angel Moroni have struck his head on the ceiling when he appeared to Joseph Smith in his room?}}
{{endnotes sources}}


[[es:La visita de Moroni/Moroni habría golpeado la cabeza en el techo]]
[[pt:A Visita de Morôni/Moroni teria bateu a cabeça no teto]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/Joining other churches

2017-06-06T20:45:38Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/Joseph Smith se juntou a outras igrejas

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Joseph Smith joined other churches
|subject=Did Joseph Smith join other churches contrary to commandment in the First Vision?
|summary=
|sublink1=Question: Did Joseph Smith join the Methodist, Presbyterian, or Baptist churches between 1820 and 1830 despite the claim made in his 1838 history that he was forbidden by Deity from joining any denomination?
|sublink2=Question: Did Joseph Smith become a baptized member of the Baptist Church in 1822?
|sublink3=Question: Did Joseph Smith become a member of the Methodist Church while he was translating the Book of Mormon?
|sublink4=Question: Did Joseph Smith join the Presbyterian Church after the First Vision?
|sublink5=Questions: Are there contemporary witnesses that confirm that Joseph Smith didn't join any church after the First Vision?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith join the Methodist, Presbyterian, or Baptist churches between 1820 and 1830 despite the claim made in his 1838 history that he was forbidden by Deity from joining any denomination?}}
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith become a baptized member of the Baptist Church in 1822?}}
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith become a member of the Methodist Church while he was translating the Book of Mormon?}}
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith join the Presbyterian Church after the First Vision?}}
{{:Questions: Are there contemporary witnesses that confirm that Joseph Smith didn't join any church after the First Vision?}}
{{SeeAlso|First Vision/Methodist camp meetings|l1=Joseph Smith and Methodist camp meetings}}
{{CriticalSources}}
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:First Vision]]

[[de:Joseph Smiths Erste Vision/Joseph Smith wurde Mitglied anderer Kirchen]]
[[pt:A Primeira Visão/Joseph Smith se juntou a outras igrejas]]

Moroni's visit/Angel of Satan

2017-06-06T20:45:37Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Moronis Besuch/Ein Engel Satans, es:La visita de Moroni/Ángel de Satanás, pt:A Visita de Morôni/Anjo de Satanás

{{Articles FAIR copyright}}
<onlyinclude>
{{SummaryHeader
|link=Moroni's visit/Angel of Satan
|subject=Theories that Moroni could have actually been something other than an angel sent by God
|summary=Some critics have charged that Moroni, the resurrected prophet who gave the Book of Mormon plates to Joseph Smith, was really an angel of Satan. They base this charge on two passages in the New Testament: 2 Corinthians 11:13–15 and Galatians 1:8.
|sublink1=Question: Could Moroni have been an "angel of Satan"?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Could Moroni have been an "angel of Satan"?}}
{{endnotes sources}}


[[de:Moronis Besuch/Ein Engel Satans]]
[[es:La visita de Moroni/Ángel de Satanás]]
[[pt:A Visita de Morôni/Anjo de Satanás]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/1830 statement about seeing "God"

2017-06-06T20:45:34Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/1830 declaração sobre ver "Deus"

#REDIRECT [[Question: Is the fact that Latter-day Saint missionaries were teaching around 1 November 1830 that Joseph Smith had seen “God” personally a reference to having seen Jesus Christ, but not the Father?]]

[[pt:A Primeira Visão/1830 declaração sobre ver "Deus"]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/Prophet's mother said First Vision was of an "angel"

2017-06-06T20:45:33Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/A mãe de Profeta disse Primeira Visão foi de um "anjo"

#REDIRECT [[Question: Did Joseph Smith's mother say that the First Vision was of an "angel"?]]

[[pt:A Primeira Visão/A mãe de Profeta disse Primeira Visão foi de um "anjo"]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/Multiple accounts of the First Vision/A "mormoninfographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account

2017-06-06T20:45:32Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/Um "Infográfico Mórmon" erroneamente indica que as palavras "Deus o Pai" e "Jesus Cristo" aparecem no registro de Joseph de 1838

#REDIRECT [[Question: Did the actual words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account of the First Vision?]]

[[pt:A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/Um "Infográfico Mórmon" erroneamente indica que as palavras "Deus o Pai" e "Jesus Cristo" aparecem no registro de Joseph de 1838]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/Story became more detailed and colorful after 1832

2017-06-06T20:45:31Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/História tornou-se mais detalhado e colorido após 1832

#REDIRECT [[Question: Did Joseph Smith’s account of the First Vision grow more detailed and more colorful after he first recorded it in 1832?]]

[[pt:A Primeira Visão/História tornou-se mais detalhado e colorido após 1832]]

Joseph Smith's First Vision/Other people had visions of God

2017-06-06T20:45:30Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding pt:A Primeira Visão/Outras pessoas tiveram visões de Deus

#REDIRECT [[Question: What is the difference between Joseph Smith's first vision and other reported visions of God at the time?]]

[[pt:A Primeira Visão/Outras pessoas tiveram visões de Deus]]

Question: Where did 19th-Century Latter-day Saints believe that Freemasonry came from?

2017-06-06T20:44:28Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Ursprünge der Freimaurerei

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Where did 19th-Century Latter-day Saints believe that Freemasonry came from?
|category=Temples/Freemasonry
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Where did 19th-Century Latter-day Saints believe that Freemasonry came from?==
===It was a common 19th century belief of both Mormons and Masons that Masonry had it origins in the Temple of Solomon===

The Saints of Joseph Smith's era accepted the then-common belief that Masonry ultimately sprang from Solomon's temple. Thus, Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball understood Masonry to be a corrupted form of a pristine ancient temple rite. <ref>See Footnote 30, {{FR-10-1-4}}</ref> One author later wrote that masonry as an "institution dates its origins many centuries back, it is only a perverted Priesthood stolen from the Temples of the Most High." <ref>{{Instructor1 | author=H. Belnap | article=A Mysterious Preacher|date=15 March 1886|vol=21|num=?|start=91|}}; cited in {{FR-10-1-4}}</ref>

It was a common 19th century belief of both Mormons and Masons that Masonry had it origins in the Temple of Solomon. A few Masons cling to this view even today. An opinion not, it turns out, supported by the historical evidence but it was only an opinion. When studying the relationship between Mormonism and the fraternal order known as Freemasonry it is important to acknowledge and understand the perspective expressed by nineteenth century Latter-day Saints. Below are seven examples of what some Mormons thought about where the rites and teachings of the Masons came from (some of these people were also Masons). Notice that some of these quotes purport to reflect the view of the Prophet Joseph Smith on this subject.

===Early Latter-day Saints' views of Freemasonry===

Joseph Fielding wrote during the Nauvoo period:

<blockquote>
Many have joined the Masonic institution. This seems to have been a stepping stone or preparation for something else, the true origin of Masonry. This I have also seen and rejoice in it.... I have evidence enough that Joseph is not fallen. I have seen him after giving, as I before said, the origin of Masonry. <ref>{{BYUS1|author=Andrew F. Ehat|article='They Might Have Known That He Was Not a Fallen Prophet'—The Nauvoo Journal of Joseph Fielding|vol=19|num=2|date=1979|start=145, 147, spelling and punctuation standardized}}</ref>
</blockquote>

Heber C. Kimball wrote of the endowment:

<blockquote>
We have received some precious things through the Prophet on the Priesthood which would cause your soul to rejoice. I cannot give them to you on paper for they are not to be written so you must come and get them for yourself...There is a similarity of Priesthood in Masonry. Brother Joseph says Masonry was taken from Priesthood but has become degenerated. But many things are perfect. <ref>Heber C. Kimball to Parley P. Pratt, 17 June 1842, Parley P. Pratt Papers, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah, spelling and punctuation standardized.</ref>
</blockquote>

Thus, to Joseph's contemporaries, there was much more to the LDS temple endowment than just warmed-over Freemasonry. None of Joseph's friends complained that he had simply adapted Masonic ritual for his own purposes. Rather, they were aware of the common ritual elements, but understood that Joseph had restored something that was both ritually and theologically ancient and God-given.

===Early Church leaders believed that Freemasonry was an "apostate" form of the Endowment===

*'''Willard Richards (16 March 1842)''': “Masonry had its origin in the Priesthood. A hint to the wise is sufficient.” <ref>Letter, 7–25 March 1842, Willard Richards to Levi Richards, published in Joseph Grant Stevenson, ed., ''Richards Family History'' (Provo, UT: Stevenson’s Genealogical Center, 1991), 3:90.</ref>
*'''Heber C. Kimball (17 June 1842)''': “There is a similarity of priesthood in Masonry. Brother Joseph [Smith] says Masonry was taken from priesthood.” <ref>Stanley B. Kimball, ''Heber C. Kimball: Mormon Patriarch and Pioneer'' (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1981), 85.</ref>
*'''Benjamin F. Johnson (1843)''': Joseph Smith “told me Freemasonry, as at present, was the apostate endowments, as sectarian religion was the apostate religion.” <ref>Benjamin F. Johnson, ''My Life’s Review'' (Heber City, UT: Archive Publishers, 2001), 113.</ref>
*'''Joseph Fielding (December 1843)''': The LDS temple ordinances are “the true origin of Masonry.” <ref>''Brigham Young University Studies'', vol. 19, no. 2, Winter 1979, 145; hereafter cited as ''BYUS''.</ref>
*'''Saints in Salt Lake City (1849–50)''': “Masonry was originally of the church, and one of its favored institutions, to advance the members in their spiritual functions. It had become perverted from its designs.” <ref>John W. Gunnison, ''The Mormons, or Latter-day Saints, in the Valley of the Great Salt Lake'' (Philadelphia: Lippincott and Company, 1856), 59.</ref>
*'''Heber C. Kimball (9 November 1858)''': “The Masonry of today is received from the apostasy. . . . They have now and then a thing that is correct, but we have the real thing.” <ref>''BYUS'', vol. 15, no. 4, Summer 1975, 458.</ref>
*'''Church Authorities (1842–1873)''': “The Mormon leaders have always asserted that Free-Masonry was a . . . degenerate representation of the order of the true priesthood.” <ref>Thomas B. H. Stenhouse, ''The Rocky Mountain Saints'' (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1873), 698.</ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:The Changing World of Mormonism]]
[[Category:Mormon Stories' "Questions and Answers"]]

[[de:Ursprünge der Freimaurerei]]
[[es:Pregunta: ¿Cuál fue el origen de la masonería según los Santos de los Últimos Días del siglo 19?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: De onde os Santos dos Últimos Dias do século XIX acreditam que a Maçonaria veio?]]

Word of Wisdom/Cola drinks and caffeine

2017-06-06T20:44:27Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Wort der Weisheit:Colagetränke

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{Resource Title|Mormonism, the Word of Wisdom and caffeine}}
<onlyinclude>
{{:Question: Is it true that Mormons are forbidden from drinking cola drinks such as Coke, Pepsi and Dr Pepper?}}
{{:Source:LDS Newsroom:the Church revelation spelling out health practices does not mention the use of caffeine}}
{{:Question: If Mormons don't drink coffee and tea because it contains caffeine, then why do they consume other products which contain caffeine?}}
{{SeeAlso|Church integrity/Accusations of hypocrisy in Church practices|l1=Does the Church own the Coca-Cola Company?}}
{{NoOfficial}}

</onlyinclude>
{{CriticalSources}}
{{endnotes sources}}



[[de:Wort der Weisheit:Colagetränke]]

Question: Do the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence?

2017-06-06T20:44:26Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Schwarze und das Priestertum/HLT-Schriften

{{FME-Source
|title=Question: Do the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence?
|category=Blacks and the priesthood
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Do the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence?==
===The Book of Mormon does not appear to have been used in a justification for the priesthood ban===

It has been claimed that the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon link a person's skin color to their behavior in the pre-existence. Those who claim that the Book of Mormon is racist often cite Book of Mormon passages like {{s|2|Nephi|5|21-25}} and {{s||Alma|3|6-10}} while ignoring the more representative {{s|2|Nephi|26|33}}.

===The Book of Abraham says nothing about lineages set aside in the pre-existence===

Some contend that even though the doctrinal impact of pre-1978 statements have been greatly diminished, the LDS scriptures still retain the passages which were used for proof-texts for the ban and hence cannot be easily dismissed. A parallel can be drawn between Protestant denominations that have historically reversed their scriptural interpretations supporting slavery and a modified LDS understanding of their own scriptures that relate to the priesthood ban. Through more careful scripture reading and attention to scientific studies, many Protestants have come to differ with previous interpretations of Bible passages. A similar rethinking of passages unique to the LDS scriptures, such as {{s||Abraham|1|26-27}}, can be made if one starts by discarding erroneous preconceptions. Sociologist Armand Mauss critiqued former interpretations in a recent address:

<blockquote>
[W]e see that the Book of Abraham says nothing about lineages set aside in the pre-existence, but only about distinguished individuals. The Book of Abraham is the only place, furthermore, that any scriptures speak of the priesthood being withheld from any lineage, but even then it is only the specific lineage of the pharaohs of Egypt, and there is no explanation as to why that lineage could not have the priesthood, or whether the proscription was temporary or permanent, or which other lineages, if any, especially in the modern world, would be covered by that proscription. At the same time, the passages in Genesis and Moses, for their part, do not refer to any priesthood proscription, and no color change occurs in either Cain or Ham, or even in Ham's son Canaan, who, for some unexplained reason, was the one actually cursed! There is no description of the mark on Cain, except that the mark was supposed to protect him from vengeance. It's true that in the seventh chapter of Moses, we learn that descendants of Cain became black, but not until the time of Enoch, six generations after Cain, and even then only in a vision of Enoch about an unspecified future time. There is no explanation for this blackness; it is not even clear that we are to take it literally.<ref>Armand L. Mauss, "The LDS Church and the Race Issue: A Study in Misplaced Apologetics", FAIR Conference 2003 {{fairlink|url=http://www.blacklds.org/mormon/mauss.html}}, {{fairlink|url=http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/conf/2003MauA.html #2}}</ref>
</blockquote>

Richard L. Bushman, LDS author of a biography of Joseph Smith, writes:

<blockquote>
...[T]he fact that [the Lamanites] are Israel, the chosen of God, adds a level of complexity to the Book of Mormon that simple racism does not explain. Incongruously, the book champions the Indians' place in world history, assigning them to a more glorious future than modern American whites.... Lamanite degradation is not ingrained in their natures, ineluctably bonded to their dark skins. Their wickedness is wholly cultural and frequently reversed. During one period, "they began to be a very industrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephites; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them." ({{s||Alma|23|18}}) In the end, the Lamanites triumph. The white Nephites perish, and the dark Lamanites remain.<ref>{{RSR1|start=99}}</ref>
</blockquote>

One faithful black member, Marcus Martins—also chair of the department of religious education at BYU-Hawaii—has said:

<blockquote>
The [priesthood] ban itself was not racist, but, unfortunately, it gave cover to people who were.<ref>Marcus Martins, "A Black Man in Zion: Reflections on Race in the Restored Gospel" (2006 FAIR Conference presentation).</ref>
</blockquote>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:MormonThink]]

[[de:Schwarze und das Priestertum/HLT-Schriften]]
[[pt:Pergunta: o Livro de Abraão e do Livro de Mórmon vincular a cor da pele de uma pessoa ao seu comportamento na pré-existência?]]

Question: Was Brigham Young a racist?

2017-06-06T20:44:25Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Rassistische Äußerungen von Kirchenführern

{{FME-Source}}
<onlyinclude>
==Question: Was Brigham Young a racist?==
===Brigham Young made a number of statements which are now considered blatantly racist===

Brigham Young made a number of statements which are now considered blatantly racist. <ref>{{CriticalWork:Dehlin:Questions and Answers:25 June 2014}}; {{CriticalWork:McKeeverJohnson:Mormonism 101|pages=Chapter 16}};
{{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing|pages=10–11}}; {{CriticalWork:Watchman Fellowship:Articles|pages=3}}</ref>

Why did past prophets make racist statements? God had already revealed to Peter that he should not call anything "common" that God had cleansed ({{b||Acts|10|9-16}}), yet some modern-day prophets thought that blacks were inferior to whites; why is that?

Elder Neil L. Anderson said,
<blockquote>
A few question their faith when they find a statement made by a Church leader decades ago that seems incongruent with our doctrine. There is an important principle that governs the doctrine of the Church. The doctrine is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find. The leaders of the Church are honest but imperfect men. Remember the words of Moroni: “Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father … ; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been” ({{s||Ether|12|6}}). <ref>Neil L. Anderson, [https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/10/trial-of-your-faith?lang=eng Trial of Your Faith], ''Ensign'' (November 2012)</ref>
</blockquote>

===We should be forgiving of past prophets who we today would perceive as being "racists," or otherwise unsophisticated when compared to the present day===

We should be forgiving of past prophets who we today would perceive as being "racists," or otherwise unsophisticated when compared to the present day. Lest we judge harshly, we ought to consider that even the Savior himself spoke of "outsiders" using language that we today would consider grossly offensive ({{b||Matthew|15|26}}).

We are warned, however, that ''we'' will be judged in the same manner in which we judge others ({{b||Matthew|7|2}}, {{b||Mark|4|24}}). If we condemn those of the past for being imperfect or influenced by their culture, what can we expect for ourselves?

{{Epigraph|“On the day I arrived, students had seen the segment in which Governor Ross Barnett physically bars James Meredith from registering at Ole Miss. In the ensuring discussion, the teacher asked students why Barnett objected to Meredith’s enrollment. One boy raised his hand and volunteered, ‘Prejudice.’ The teacher nodded and the discussion moved on. 

“That simple ‘prejudice’ unsettled me. Four hundred years of racial history reduced to a one-word response? This set me to wondering what would it take before we begin to think historically about such concepts as ‘prejudice,’ racism,’ ‘tolerance,’ fairness,’ and ‘equity.’ At what point do we come to see these abstractions not as transcendent truths soaring above time and place, but as patterns of thought that take root in particular historical moments, develop, grow, and emerge in new forms in successive generations while still bearing traces of their former selves?”
::: — Sam Wineburg, ''Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts'' (Philadeliphia: temple University Press, 2001), 17.}}

{{SeeAlso|Fallibility_of_prophets|l1=Official Church doctrine and statements by Church leaders|Blacks and the priesthood/Understanding pre-1978 statements|l2=Understanding pre-1978 statements}}

===The perception that past prophets were "just like us" is incorrect===

In the Church we spend a lot of time "likening the scriptures unto ourselves," to use Nephi's phrase ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}).

This approach has the advantage of making the teachings of the scriptures and early Church leaders apply to us, so they become agents of change in our lives, rather than just artifacts to be studied in a detached way.

The disadvantage of this approach, though, is that it can build the perception that past prophets were "just like us" — having all the same assumptions, traditions, and beliefs. But this is not the case at all. Prophets in all dispensations have been "men of their times," who were raised with certain beliefs and interacted all their lives with others who shared those beliefs.

For example, the Old Testament peoples believed the earth was a flat expanse, with the sky a solid dome made out of a shiny, brass-like substance. But this was the way ''everyone'' understood things at that time, so we don't begrudge Isaiah and Ezekiel of speaking of the "four corners of the earth" ({{b||Isaiah|11|12}}; {{b||Ezekiel|7|2}}), or Job for thinking the sky was a mirror ({{b||Job|37|18}}), or the Psalmist for thinking the earth stood still while the sun went around it ({{b||Psalms|93|1}}; {{b||Psalms|19|4-6}}).

The same principle holds true when examining the beliefs of earlier prophets about people of different races. Most nineteenth-century Latter-day Saints were raised in a world where all Black people were either slaves or illiterate poor. At the time there was much debate among American Christians in general as to how Blacks fit into God's overall plan as described in the Bible. Many theories abounded, with virtually all of them justifying, in one way or another, slavery or relegation of Blacks to the role of second-class citizens. There was even debate as to whether or not Blacks were human beings with souls that could receive salvation. (In contrast to this general Christian view, Joseph Smith declared rather progressively that yes, Blacks ''did'' have souls and could be saved.<ref>{{TPJS1|start=269}}</ref>

===Some LDS leaders were wary of the civil rights movement that started in the 1950s, and publicly stated their concerns===

This continued into the twentieth century. Some LDS leaders were wary of the civil rights movement that started in the 1950s, and publicly stated their concerns. But there were differences of opinion among the brethren on this. At one end was Elder Ezra Taft Benson, who believed that the American civil rights movement was a front for communism; at the other was President Hugh B. Brown, who felt that the Church should publicly support the civil rights movement.<ref>See {{RMM1|start=chapter 4}}</ref>

From our perspective as "enlightened" people of the early twenty-first century, virtually everyone in America up until the last few decades — prophets and other LDS leaders included — held beliefs that we could now consider racist. But that was the culture of the times, and we, like the rest of society, have progressed (line upon line, precept upon precept, see {{s|2|Nephi|28|30}}) to become better people in this respect, more tolerant, more accepting. Fifty years from now, people will probably look back at ''our'' time and say, "How could ''they'' have been so bigoted?" Or, "How could they have missed issue X, which seems so clear to us now, in retrospect?"

===The key point here is that the Lord works with the people who are available===

The key point here is that the Lord works with the people who are available. He does not make them into radicals; he gives them just enough light and understanding to lift the Saints a little and make them more fit for the kingdom. In his mercy, God works with people where they are, and does not wait for them to be perfect before he will deign to speak to them.

Non-LDS Biblical commentators have noted this same tendency is present with Biblical prophets:

<blockquote>
Though purified and ennobled by the influence of His Holy Spirit; men each with his own peculiarities of manner and disposition—each with his own education or want of education—each with his own way of looking at things—each influenced differently from another by the different experiences and disciplines of his life. Their inspiration did not involve a suspension of their natural faculties; it did not even make them free from earthly passion; it did not make them into machines—it left them men. Therefore we find their knowledge sometimes no higher than that of their contemporaries.<ref>James R. Dummelow, ''A Commentary on the Holy Bible: Complete in one volume, with general articles'' (New York : Macmillan, 1984 [1904]), cxxxv.</ref>
</blockquote>

{{SeeAlso|Fallibility_of_prophets|l1=Official Church doctrine and statements by Church leaders|Blacks and the priesthood/Understanding pre-1978 statements|l2=Understanding pre-1978 statements}}

</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}

[[Category:John Dehlin's "Questions and Answers"]]

[[de:Rassistische Äußerungen von Kirchenführern]]

Primary sources regarding Church leaders' statements about organic evolution/First Presidency 1925

2017-06-06T20:44:24Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Schöpfung/Evolution:Stellungnahme der Ersten Präsidentschaft 1925

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
A statement by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

"God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him: male and female created he them."

In these plain and pointed words the inspired author of the book of Genesis made known to the world the truth concerning the origin of the human family. Moses, the prophet-historian, who was "learned" we are told, "in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," when making this important announcement, was not voicing a mere opinion. He was speaking as the mouthpiece of God, and his solemn declaration was for all time and for all people. No subsequent revelator of the truth has contradicted the great leader and law-giver of Israel. All who have since spoken by divine authority upon this theme have confirmed his simple and sublime proclamation. Nor could it be otherwise. Truth has but one source, and all revelations from heaven are harmonious one with the other.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is "the express image" of his Father's person ([http://scriptures.lds.org/heb/1/3#3 Hebrews 1:3]). He walked the earth as a human being, as a perfect man, and said, in answer to a question put to him: "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/john/14/9#9 John 14:9]). This alone ought to solve the problem to the satisfaction of every thoughtful, reverent mind. It was in this form that the Father and the Son, as two distinct personages, appeared to Joseph Smith, when, as a boy of fourteen years, he received his first vision.

The Father of Jesus Christ is our Father also. Jesus himself taught this truth, when he instructed his disciples how to pray: "Our Father which art in heaven," etc. Jesus, however, is the first born among all the sons of God—the first begotten in the spirit, and the only begotten in the flesh. He is our elder brother, and we, like him, are in the image of God. All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally sons and daughters of Deity.

Adam, our great progenitor, "the first man," was, like Christ, a pre-existent spirit, and, like Christ, he took upon him an appropriate body, the body of a man, and so became a "living soul." The doctrine of pre-existence pours wonderful flood of light upon the otherwise mysterious problem of man's origin. It shows that man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father, prior to coming upon the earth in a temporal body to undergo an experience in mortality.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. By his Almighty power God organized the earth, and all that it contains, from spirit and element, which exist co-eternally with himself.

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.

Heber J. Grant, 
Anthony W. Ivins, 
Charles W. Nibley. 
''First Presidency''.

''Source: "Editors' Table: 'Mormon' View of Evolution," ''Improvement Era'' 28:11 (September 1925).''
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[de:Schöpfung/Evolution:Stellungnahme der Ersten Präsidentschaft 1925]]

Book of Abraham/Book of the Dead/Scan (small)

2017-06-06T20:44:23Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Sicht der Quelle vom Buch Abraham/Buch der Toten/Scan (klein)

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
* ''From:'' {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|date=August 1968|start=56|end=57}}
*(To see full size pages, click [[Book_of_Abraham/Book_of_the_Dead/Scan_%28full size%29|here]].) (680 KB)

[[Image:Book_of_Dead_IE_Aug_1968-_smaller.JPG]]
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[de:Sicht der Quelle vom Buch Abraham/Buch der Toten/Scan (klein)]]

Book of Abraham/Book of the Dead/Scan (full size)

2017-06-06T20:44:22Z

RKMBot: Bot: Adding de:Sicht der Quelle vom Buch Abraham/Buch der Toten/Scan (volle Größe)

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
* ''From:'' {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|date=August 1968|start=56|end=57}}

*(To see a smaller scan, click [[Book_of_Abraham/Book_of_the_Dead/Scan_%28small%29|here]].)

[[Image:Book of Dead IE Aug 1968.jpg]]
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[de:Sicht der Quelle vom Buch Abraham/Buch der Toten/Scan (volle Größe)]]