Prophets are not perfect

[72Vortex]

God would not and did not choose a pedophile to speak for him.

Joseph Smith was no more a prophet than Warren Jeffs or David Karesh. Mormon scholars all understand there is no proof of 'The Lamanites' being from Israel. They came from Northeastern Asia accross the Bering Strait. The BOM has been scientifically proven false archeologically, DNA, linguistically, and historically but the church leaders don't want people to leave the faith. The church has some value to it but it is sexist, racist.

[Ahashdah]

Hi, Polish dude! You're not skinny enough, to be Abinadi. Maybe, just maybe, you are not "white and delightsome" enough, either!

Prophets are not perfect.

Thieves are not perfect, either: just like the thief who, when caught, whined, "I'm not perfect, yet."

(At which the arresting officer simply said, "Tell that to the judge.")

[rickgigliotti]

True prophets are 100% correct according to the Bible.  Mormon prophets are less than 50%

[orlovna2]

The Bible is an ancient set of writings...comprised of "66 books".

Having said that, the ancient prophets did NOT lead the people!

ONLY in the Mormon Crutch do you have so-called prophets as LEADERS!

Anciently, there were no "leader dogs" called prophets: they were largely "itinerant". They did NOT lead. The Mormon Equivalent is found in King Saul and King David: because mormon leader-dogs LEAD.

And, again: ancient prophets did not "lead": they (by definition) prophesied only.

[bossendenwoodconvict]

If there was no error in the revelations Smith taught (4.08) why re-write them?

[orlovna2]

@bossendenwoodconvict

Re-writing gives the people greater and warmer fuzzy feelings.  And, it tickles their ears, too!

[exmo81]

Yes prophets are not perfect but Prophets give prophecies, that is why they are called prophets. The bible said to test a true prophet, all of their prophecies must come true. If it did not, then they are not a true prophet of God. Did all Joseph's prophecies came true? Study on your own to find out, and don't be afraid to accept the facts.

[PolishAbinadi]

exmo81, reading Mormon critics is a sort of hobby of mine. Believe me - I am aware of the accusations against Joseph Smith, including his unfulfilled "prophecies". First, the antis fail to recognize the prophecies he gave "in the name of the Lord" which amazingly did come true in every detail. Second, there is a difference between prophecy and speculation. Joseph Smith - like every other person - did speculate from time to time and sometimes he was wrong. So was Moses, Peter and others. So what?

[orlovna2]

@PolishAbinadi

The "failed" prophecies would have been dropped, quickly, and covered up: There is one where Jos.Smith prophesies the death of their traditional enemy, ex-governor of Missouri, Lilburn W. Boggs. The prophecy failed: even though Smith celebrated" Boggs' death, when Jos.' henchman, O.P.Rockwell, rode back into Nauvoo and proclaimed that "Boggs is dead".

SURPRISE! SURPRISE! Boggs had been shot in the head several times (by Rockwell): but, Boggs miraciulously survived!

[orlovna2]

@PolishAbinadi

I don't want to fault you. You are doing the "generalization" thing, here. You are saying, "Jos. Smith may have speculated, and so did Moses, Peter, and the others."

You do what typical Mormons do, friend! You "lump him" into a larger barrel. And, that is simply not true!

When you do that, the burden is on you, to show that Moses speculated. Don't rush to say that Peter speculated, either. Peter doubted, for a time--yes. Speculated? NO.

YOU must show otherwise.

[AlmightyDoctor]

The Mormon Jesus.

[TrueSaintsLDS]

The imposter Doctor.

[imtherealthing]

Great video brother...keep up the good work and defending and proclaiming the TRUE faith.

[GiftoAll]

To become a prophet you must first be elected into higher priesthood position and then move upward to apostle positions. If God was involved in selecting these guys there wouldn't be any need to have a show of hands by the members. Gods word is final and cannot be disputed or agreed upon by men

[PolishAbinadi]

GiftoAll - "If God was involved in selecting these guys there wouldn't be any need to have a show of hands by the members."

*You claim you live in SLC and that you used to be LDS, but you seem not to understand some of our basic doctrines and practices. There is no voting or election campaign for Church offices. God calls his servants. We - as members simply have the opportunity to show we will support His decision and help his elect perform their duties. It's a wonderful system.

[GiftoAll]

You are right. There is no ballot voting for each appointment but there is a confidence vote. The positions that are filled are NOT from a direct revelation from God. All leaders are chosen by the feelings of each ecclesiastical member of the group. It's just a democratic type of appointment with more feelings involved.

[PolishAbinadi]

GiftoAll - "The positions that are filled are NOT from a direct revelation from God...."

*Thank you for sharing your opinion, but it is just an opinion. I - as well as every other faithful member of the Church - have been given responsibilities and often been involved in extending responsibilities to others. We know Church callings come from God. But (just as you) we cannot prove it. All we can do is testify of it.

[orlovna2]

@PolishAbinadi

Are you in Poland, then? Of Polish-German descent?

The German High Command, of the Third Reich, would have been proud of you! Very very proud! (And, so would Tommy S. Monson be proud of you: for being a good soldier, under the Authority of the Mormon High Command).

That is just nucking futs!

[orlovna2]

@PolishAbinadi

You "sustain" those leader-dogs in being LEADERS OVER YOU!

Hello??? That is what leaders want! They want people who will not question them, in what they do: even if it is wrong.

If you can get those "warm and fuzzy feelings", then you can be kept in line: by a show of hands that you will be good little mormon followers.

Now, bow your head and say, "yes".

That will do!

[1300mi]

Absolutely great video. Hugh B. Brown said something is only official revelation if it is written and signed by all three of the first presidency.

Imperfect... perfect point. Transgressions don't negate one's teachings. An example outside the church, Chogyam Trungpa, the man who brought Buddhism to America. He was a great spiritual teacher... he was also an alcoholic, and adulterer. Those facts don't negate his teachings one bit. There are countless more examples like him throughout history.

[myway43]

Great video Abinadi, I really like your videos, I learn a lot from them. keep them coming.

thanks

[gregoree1]

that was a good vid, never looked at it that way! would a prophet tell a person or he's followers a lie, lead them wrong?

[PolishAbinadi]

I think one of the main messages of the Bible is that those who follow the council of the living prophet are blessed. In the whole history of humanity we have never had one case when a prophet would lead people astray.

Prophets are also people. They have their opinions and sometimes they make mistakes. Moses had to be corrected a few times. Peter denied Jesus 3 times. Apostles sometimes had arguments, etc. But none of them has ever led people astray.

[moparmonster1965]

"In the whole history of humanity we have never had one case when a prophet would lead people astray."

Interesting. How fo you explain away Brigham Young teaching that Adam was God and Jesus was his Son?

[PolishAbinadi]

moparmonster1965 - "How fo you explain away Brigham Young teaching that Adam was God and Jesus was his Son?"

*Even if Brigham Young did try to lead people astray - he wouldn't be able to because until all living apostles unanimously accept a new doctrine or revelation, it isn't Church doctrine. If BY really taught that - it was simply his opinion. Did Peter lead anyone astray because he denied Christ? Or Moses - because he made a few mistakes? Of course not. They were humans too.

[moparmonster1965]

The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray." (Gospel Principles, p. 49-50)

Since the prophet alone speaks for God, the apostles' opinions are meaningless, no matter who votes for what.

And since the church commissioned, approved, and published the JOD, they therefore have Jesus' stamp of approval on them.

He wouldn't allow such things to be published in his name if they weren't right. It just wouldn't make sense, would it?

[PolishAbinadi]

moparmonster1965

*I find it quite startling how you just can't let one or two quotes you apparently don't understand go. If I remember correctly - I spent hours or days a year or more ago responding to your comments about BY and his statements about Adam.

*I can just imagine what you would do if the Church started removing often misunderstood statements from JOD - would you ever stop accusing it of distortion, misleading, cover up, etc.?

The truth is: Anti-Mormons will never be satisfied.

[moparmonster1965]

"We should follow his (the Prophet's) inspired teachings completely. We should not choose to follow part of his inspired counsel and discard that which is unpleasant or difficult.

The Lord commanded us to follow the inspired teachings of the prophet: 'Thou halt heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

'For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith (D&C 21:4-5).'

[moparmonster1965]

That he taught the Adam/God doctrine is most certain.

"He (Adam) is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." (JOD Vol 1 p 50)

Heber C.Kimball, first councilor to BY stated: "I have learned by experience that there is but one God that pertians to this people, and he is the God that pertains to this earth--the first man, that first man sent his own son to redeem the world..." (JOD, Vol 4, p 1)

[Ahwri]

A prophet is only a prophet when he acts as such--it's so true! Thank you for this video; humans are still human, and so we ought not to expect perfection from our prophets :), only inspired revelation and good examples.

[hoofa28]

I LOVE THIS VIDEO...GOOD JOB

[moparmonster1965]

I'm not upset at all. I most certainly have agreed with you on a few points. In fact, I've even defended you (Mormons) on occasion, haven't I? Indeed, I have, so playing the victim role isn't applicable here.

[PolishAbinadi]

Good then.

8-)

[moparmonster1965]

Regarding reading the BOM:

I'm taking it as the church has presented it: the most correct book on earth, but it has yet to live up to that claim.

[PolishAbinadi]

Sounds good to me. If you can show me any other book that more correctly presents the Plan of our Heavenly Father for you and me and everybody else, that explains who we are, what God expects from us, what is going to happen to us after we die, who God is, what He is like, who Jesus is, what he has done, how his Atonement works, how his grace works, etc., etc. - I will be impressed. If you can't - you must admit - the Book of Mormon is the most correct of all books.

Take care, friend!

[moparmonster1965]

Which scientists specifically? And true, there's no doubt that when Smith wrote the BOM, he was referring to the Mayan, Aztec, and Toltec ruins in Mexico and Yucatan, there hasn't been single translation or artifact that confirms anything the BOM claims. And didn't Thomas Ferguson return from his archaeological research an apostate? For 10 years, he looked and found absoultely nothing. From the BOM, we clearly know that Jesus appeared to the Mayan, however.

[Exodus314IAM]

Can you show me some sorce of this? can you explane Brigham Young Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 53-54. Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pp. 219-220?

If I am wrong I would like to be shown, I could be wrong, im not mormon but I have mormon friends and I do respect mormons faith they have in christ! its just a little off track!

God Bless

[PolishAbinadi]

Hi Exodus - Sorry I have been silent for 3 days but life gets hectic sometimes.

I've read the two sermons again - I must say - with pleasure. I absolutely love Brigham Young and his style. He gets tough sometimes but he always has good reasons.

Well - the sermons were given in 1856 and 1857. Obviously I wasn't alive then so I don't know the whole background, etc., so I might be wrong in my interpretation, but I will try to share my feelings about them anyway...

[PolishAbinadi]

... The 1st sermon (Sept 21, 1856):

B.Y. is saying here that the Rocky Mountains is a perfect place for the Saints because the place provides a lot of challenges which build their character.

He calls the Mormons to repent of their sins before the judgment day (ex. the day someone dies).

Some sins are so serious (ex. murder) that no forgiveness is possible. In ancient times Israelites would volunteer to have their life taken in order to atone for the deadly sin...

[PolishAbinadi]

...Brigham says: "You have been taught that doctrine, but you do not understand it", so obviously it isn't really clear. But it doesn't have to, since the doctrine cannot be practiced unless it is restored by revelation (it has not been in this dispensation).

B.Y. condemns men for abusing their wives and tells them to "treat them as an angel would treat them"

He offers women grant them divorce on a spot if they don't want to be polygamous wives anymore....

[PolishAbinadi]

...B.Y. then reminds that no perfection or fullness of joy should be expected in this life:

"The only heaven for you is that which you make yourselves. My heaven is here [laying his hand upon his heart]. I carry it with me. When do I expect it in its perfection? When I come up in the resurrection; then I shall have it, and not till then."

Or as other our prophets emphasize - our happiness depends on our attitude.

[PolishAbinadi]

The 2nd sermon (Feb. 8, 1857):

B.Y. expands on the doctrine that all people are literal sons and daughters of God. He says to those who don't believe it: "cease to call Him Father".

He touches on the infamous Adam-God theory emphasizing that he is stating his own opinion and not a revelation ("If I am not telling you the truth, please to tell me the truth on this subject, and let me know more than I do know"). He also says it isn't important ("I do not care for one moment how that is")....

[PolishAbinadi]

...B.Y. emphasizes that the only way a man can know and understand true doctrines is "by the Spirit of God, you will receive them by no other spirit".

He teaches that the path to salvation is "straight and narrow, simple and easy", but some have wandered off.

He then calls them to repentance, emphasizing how serious some sins might be...

[PolishAbinadi]

... He then reminds them of the doctrine of blood atonement which was in force in ancient times ("The time has been in Israel under the law of God..."). He emphasizes that in order for the practice to make sense - the ancients had to request for their own capital punishment.

B.Y. emphasizes that the doctrine of blood atonement cannot be practice now: "The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle's being in full force..."

He then makes prediction that one day it will be.

[moparmonster1965]

You can't take the man seriously when he taught that Adam was God and that Jesus was his son, can you? This is where Mormon cherry picking comes into play: you want to use what supports your argument and forget the rest.

"We should follow his inspired teachings completely. We should not choose to follow part of his inspired counsel and discard that which is unpleasant of difficult." (Gospel Priciples, p. 49-50, 1992)

[Exodus314IAM]

You really need to check into your so called Prophets. Since Joseph Smith, how may propecies have there been and how many have come true? plus look at what they are putting out there Blood Atonement? Polygamy? Not perfect? come on people OPEN YOUR EYES!!!

The Bible gives us ways to check a Prophet; I John 1:1-3, 1 John 2:21, 1 John 4:1, 2 Peter 1:15-16

Look to God my friends, the true God of the Bible!

God Bless!!

[PolishAbinadi]

Believe me - I didn't discover the Anti-Mormon stuff yesterday. It has been my sort of hobby for years. I've heard probably most of the arguments against the Restored Gospel. Some of them don't sound very impressive - but usually because they are presented by our critics.

When you start reading real scientists' publications - you will discover sad truth about the character and motivations of the Anti-Mormons. The fact is they distort the true picture and frankly - they lie.

[Exodus314IAM]

"The fact is they distort the true picture and frankly - they lie."

So did I distort the truth or Lie? if so please explane? I will be the first to apologize if I am wrong!

I am not anti-mormon, but I am anti-mormonism! as you should be to if you saw what it is feeding you! All the lies in mormonism and taking away from the truth of the Bible! I know its hard to see it when you are so deep in it! It takes an outsider to show the light!

God Bless my friend!

[PolishAbinadi]

I wasn't talking about you. You simply mentioned some of the most controversial things about Mormonism and my assumption is that they were presented to you by the Anti-Mormons who distort the truth in order to make you and others have negative feelings about the LDS Church.

If you think that "it takes an outsider to show the light" - why don't you go outside the Anti-Mormon religion and check what for example fairlds scientists say about Polygamy, Blood Atonement and other stuff?

[PolishAbinadi]

For example - did you know that Brigham Young clearly taught that the Blood Atonement doctrine was practiced in times of Moses and could not be practiced today? Did you know that the reason for him to talk about it was to discourage the Saints from violence against their oppressors (he stressed the seriousness of killing)? Did you know that the foundation of the doctrine was personal free agency? Did you know that NOT ONE case of Mormons killing their apostates has ever been known?

[moparmonster1965]

You don't know how wrong you are. There are dozens of references all throughout JOD about Mormons killing people for this or that.

"...under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must have their own blood shed to atone for their sins..." (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, Bruce McConkie)

[PolishAbinadi]

"about Mormons killing people for this or that"

With all due respect - I find your comment very deceitful and slanderous. Why did you quote a small part of E. McConkie's article about so called "blood atonement"? Did you read this part:

"There is not one historical instance of so-called blood atonement in this dispensation, nor has there been one event or occurrence whatever, of any nature, from which the slightest inference arises that any such practice either existed or was taught."

[moparmonster1965]

"Brethern and sisters, we want you to repent and forsake your sins. And you who have committed sins that cannot be forgiven through baptism, let your blood be shed and let the smoke ascend, that the incense thereof may come up before God as an atonement for your sins, and that the sinners in Zion be afraid." (JM Grant, Deseret News, Sept. 21, 1856)

Since it was preached, it's reasonable to assume that it was accepted and practiced.

[moparmonster1965]

The word "slander" is only applicable if it's false, which this is not. Don't believe it? Here's more:

"Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God." (Brigham Young, JOD 3:247, Mar 16, 1856)

"I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins." (BY, JOD 4:220, Feb 8, 1857)

[PolishAbinadi]

The "javelin" quote is one of my favorite examples of how the Antis distort the truth.

This quote was used in 1979 publication by Jerald and Sandra Tanner "The Changing World of Mormonism". The interesting thing is that they "forgot" about a few key sentences used by Brigham Young IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH so they "accidentally" left them out.

When you read the whole paragraph, two things are apparent: BY was referring to Num. 25:6-9 and he was DISCOURAGING people from literal application of it...

[moparmonster1965]

I don't even own that book. I took it from a photocopy of Deseret News, obtained from the church archives. There's a lot of subject changes, but that speech and the subsequent one go back to blood atonement and what I quoted was word-for-word as the original. I left nothing out at all.

[PolishAbinadi]

... Here are some sentences conveniently omitted by the Tanners:

"A few of the men and women who go into the house of the Lord, and receive their endowments, and in the most sacred manner make covenants before the Almighty, go and violate those covenants. Do I have compassion on them? Yes, I do have mercy on them, for there is something in their organization which they do not understand; and there are but few in this congregation who do understand it.

You say..."

[PolishAbinadi]

... After quoting the someone who supposedly asked Brigham Young the question about the javelin, he responds:

"But you who trifle with your covenants, be careful lest in judging you will be judged.

Every man and women has got to have clean hands and a pure heart, to execute judgment, else they had better let the matter alone."

...

[moparmonster1965]

You're proving my point, not your own.

[PolishAbinadi]

Is your point that Brigham Young taught people not to judge others and leave judgment to God? If so - yes I am proving your point.

[PolishAbinadi]

...Brigham Young then says:

"Again, suppose the parties are, not caught in their iniquity, and it passes along unnoticed, shall I have compassion on them? YES, I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON THEM, for transgressions of the nature already named, or for those of any other description. If the Lord so order it that they are not caught in the act of their iniquity, it is pretty good proof that HE IS WILLING FOR THEM TO LIVE..."

[moparmonster1965]

This is what's called a contradiction; he says one thing and then says the opposite, something rife in Mormonism.

[PolishAbinadi]

...or - you need to read it again and try to understand what Brigham Young is saying.

But of course - you might choose to see what those who lie to you and me want us to see. I refuse - I prefer thinking for myself.

[moparmonster1965]

I understood quite well, thank you. He was going against what he'd already said.

[PolishAbinadi]

I am sorry you have wasted so much time reading and believing those who tried to deceive you, but it is not too late. Start reading real scholars and they will correct your opinions.

If you are interested in truth and not in condemning the LDS Church - that is.

Greetings my friend!

[moparmonster1965]

The facts are in black and white. Taken as a whole, there's not one single supporting fact for anything that Mormonism claims. It's all covered by being ordered not to read anything that's not faith inspiring, and not to look for any archaeological evidence. It's all faith and fuzzy feelings. I'm currently reading the BOM and find no inspiration in its pages and nothing divine about its message.

[PolishAbinadi]

Why almost every time Mormon critics hear valid arguments - they tend to get upset? Why can't we discuss it without being unfair? We have no problem admitting that some people have valid reasons to have views that differ from ours. Even Joseph Smith said that if he didn't experience what he did - he wouldn't believe it. Why can't you simply say that something like "I see your point." You don't have to agree with us, but getting upset and nasty is not necessary.

[PolishAbinadi]

"I'm currently reading the BOM and find no inspiration in its pages and nothing divine about its message."

Give the NT to a Jew, the Bible to an atheist and they will say exactly the same thing.

You will never find out if the BofM is true if all you do is look for errors. If someone you trust told you I was a terrorist - I bet you would suddenly start realizing that I do have strong religious feelings, I did once say something about sacrifice and I live close to the middle east... Hmm....

[PolishAbinadi]

moparmonster - You say you are reading the Book of Mormon. Why? Didn't you say that " there's not one single supporting fact for anything that Mormonism claims". Do you want me to believe that you are sincerely looking for truth?

You can find the truth only if you seek it with "sincere heart", "real intent", and "having faith in Christ" (Moroni 10:4).

I am not saying you don't have any of these things, but I think you need to have all three.

I sincerely wish you all the best.

[PolishAbinadi]

I agree that most people who read this quote would assume the same thing you seem to assume. However, the fact is that no court would consider this any sort of proof and no cases of killing apostates have ever been known. Read other sermons by Church leaders in the same period and it will be obvious to you that as much as they stressed that obedience to God's laws was important, they also stressed mercy and compassion. But of course the Anti-Mormons will never quote those parts of the sermons.

[PolishAbinadi]

Consider this for example - for awhile people who were pronounced by Utah's courts as guilty of murder and sentenced to die could choose between firing squad or lethal injection, because it was believed that voluntary shedding of blood was required to satisfy divine justice.

Notice that we are not talking about people who left the LDS Church (and there have always been hundreds and thousands of those in Utah), but those who BY LAW received the capital punishment.

[PolishAbinadi]

You might ask: "How come I never knew that?". Well - because you read the Antis and they are not interested in truth! Read scientific publications instead (Mormon or non-Mormon - doesn't matter - just make sure they are scholars not Baptist preachers, etc.).

8-)

[moparmonster1965]

Yes, I did know that, but I believe that the state has recinded the firing squad completely. I live in the mid-west and I'm in tune with what's going on.

[moparmonster1965]

I'll assume this was about me in particular.

When have I ever lied to you? When have I ever misrepresented anything I've said? When have I deliberately taken something out of context so as to deceive you?

What is my motivation? What do I have to gain here? I guess I was mistaken when I thought we were getting to be friends, but that's okay. I understand now.

[PolishAbinadi]

Hey - moparmonster1965! Don't get offended! I think we can still be friends!

I consider you and other people who have opposite views of Mormonism than mine as the victims of those who make their career publishing lies about us. My hope is that you will be willing to find out for yourself that most of their stuff is pure falsehood. You will then see that their arguments don't differ much from those of ancient Pharisees.

[moparmonster1965]

I'll tell you what: let me know where the ruins of Zarahemla, Bountiful, of Nephi-Lehi are, I'll take my next vacation there, and I'll email you some pictures. That should be easy enough, right?

We'll see who's lying then.

[PolishAbinadi]

If you send me pictures of Noah's ark, or any sort of evidence that Jesus took upon himself our sins and atoned for them or that He was and therefore we will be resurrected I will then feel obligated to show you where Zarahemla was.

Don't get be wrong - I do know that Jesus atoned for us and that He is resurrected. I also have no doubt that Noah did build the ark. All I am saying is - just because you don't see something - IT DOESN'T MEAN IT DOESN'T EXIST.

[PolishAbinadi]

I should add this though: Many scientists do believe that Zarahemla or other Book of Mormon geographical sites are known. There is plenty of evidence they are in today's Central America.

[moparmonster1965]

I'm not interested in Bible archaeology, just that in the BOM. So you're taking a different approach to saying that you don't know where any of those sites are. How about Hill Cumorah? Has anyone finally decided where that is?

On your last point, I agree, but combined with the fact that we know about the numerous contradictions in Mormon scripture, the inability of Smith to translate anything, and the thorough revision of the BOM, there stands an indictment against any claim the church makes.

[PolishAbinadi]

"How about Hill Cumorah?" - Forgive me that this is the lamest argument. We don't know where the hill is therefore the BofM is not true. Was the Bible true before Caphernaum was found?

"...we know about the numerous contradictions in Mormon scripture..." - No manipulation please - you "know" about the contradictions. We are not aware of any.

"...the inability of Smith to translate anything..." - We agree here. He couldn't translate without God's help.

[moparmonster1965]

Lameness aside, where is the Hill Cumorah? This is a discussion, is it not? You present your position and I present mine.

We'll get to the contradictions and Smith's inability to translate in the near future.

[moparmonster1965]

Lets conservatively estimate the Jaredite losses at two million (the text states millions), add another 240K Nephites and the same number of Lamanites. Were talking about 2.5 million people having died at that final battle. There should be evidence lying all over the place. After all, JS found the bones of Zelph lying out in the open, didnt he?

Im not the smartest person around, so how is it that I solved this mystery with only the BOM and HOTC?

[moparmonster1965]

This can only mean that the Hill Cumorah is either on, or within walking distance of the Smith family farm.

[PolishAbinadi]

Most of what you wrote is correct, but as they say - the devil is in the detail. Here is what you missed or misunderstood:

*The Jeredites's final battle takes place at the hill Ramah (Eth. 15:11).

*About 900 years later Mormon hides there - "in the hill Cumorah all the records ... SAVE IT WERE THESE FEW PLATES which [he] gave unto [his] son Moroni." (Morm. 6:6) - this was in year 385.

*Moroni travels all over and after year 420 he hides the plates in today's Palmyra, NY. (Moro. 10:1-2)

...

[moparmonster1965]

I'll reread that part and if you're right, I'll say so. Even so, two million people dying in one place and no evidence left anywhere? Appealing to your common sense, does that sound the least bit plausible?

Again, even if Moroni travelled to the moon and back, what would that mean to the ultimate outcome of him hiding the plates for JS to find? None.

[PolishAbinadi]

"even if Moroni travelled to the moon and back, what would that mean to the ultimate outcome of him hiding the plates for JS to find?"

Calm down, my friend. All I am saying is that it is evident that Moroni hid the plates somewhere else than the place where the battle took place.

[PolishAbinadi]

I think you put too much faith in science - more than scientists would. Archeologists constantly keep discovering amazing things. These are facts (and every serious scientists will admit it):

NOT EVERY CITY, CEMETERY OR BATTLE FIELD THAT EVER EXISTED HAS BEEN FOUND!

Call me when the archeological community announces that no more excavations will be undergone because EVERYTHING HAS BEEN DISCOVERED AND EVERYTHING IS KNOWN.

8-)

[myway43]

Mopar, If the question of archeological evidence is the only proof you will accept, then why can they not find any evidence of the Israelites in the desert after they were released from Egypt?

[moparmonster1965]

I'm not talking about the Bible; I'm talking about Mormonism.

Let's review what we have: major doctrinal contradictions, a thorough lack of evidence for anything unique to the BOM, countless changes to the BOM, and a Jesus who doesn't know the Old Testament from the New. Did I miss anything?

Take a look at 3 Nephi 20: 23-24 and tell me what's wrong.

[myway43]

My question basically about the Bible. Some say there are discrepencies in the Bible. Does that make the Bible untrue in your eyes as well? As Christians we live on Faith, you should know that. You looin for proof and evidence. Put the same test to the Bible that you put to the BOM thats all. I think if you truly did this you might not be so critical of the Church.

[moparmonster1965]

Since you're so interested in bringing the Bible down to the level of the BOM, does it not say to prove all things and hold fast to that which is true?

If I put the BOM to the same test, I would still not be able to go to Zarahemla or Bountiful, would I?

How about that 3 Nephi verse?

[myway43]

No Sir, I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, as is the BOM. My point is that you want archeological proof of the BOM. I put to you that you single out the BOM, and yet will not hold the Bible to the same test. For someone who desires proof of faith ,why do you not want to hold the Bible to that standard. May I make a recommendation? Watch a video titled "DNA and the book of Mormon 5 claims", this is a great video. the gentleman who makes this video is spot on.

[moparmonster1965]

That said, I don't place all of my eggs in that one basket. There are the specific contradictions in doctrine, truths that the church no longer follows, an almost thoroughly revised history, massive plagiarizations, and the countless changes in the BOM and Mormon texts, things that prove conclusively that the church is lying to you and me.

[moparmonster1965]

You're right on one point: a lack of archaeological evidence doesn't necessarily mean that the BOM is false. This is, of course, taking into account that there were three major civilizations that interacted for centuries but somehow left nothing behind. And since we also know that some 2.5 million people died at the Hill Cumorah, which would mean there would evidence all over the place, yet the church has never announced any major archaeological finds.

[moparmonster1965]

So, have you figured out 3 Nephi 20: 23-24 yet?

[PolishAbinadi]

...

Can you see this? From the time Moroni got the plates (and the Nephite's battle takes place) till the moment he hides them in today's NY takes OVER 65 YEARS!!!

There are thousands of hills and mountains in North and South America. One of them is the one where the battles took place. Check how many of the thousands were excavated by archeologists. If the answer is "all of them" - I will give a point.

8-)

[moparmonster1965]

Still trying to plant the small seed of doubt, I gather. Even if that's the case and I missed it, what does it matter? Moroni hid the plates for JS to find. That doesn't change the fundamentals of the story. The book is clear and there's no mention of multiple Hill Cumorahs. You're trying to muddy the water with nonsense.

[PolishAbinadi]

Here is a quote from Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

"Each summer since 1937, the Church has staged the Cumorah Pageant at this site [in Palmyra]. Entitled America's Witness for Christ, it depicts important events from Book of Mormon history. This annual pageant has reinforced the common assumption that Moroni buried the plates of Mormon in the same hill where his father had buried the other plates, thus equating this New York hill with the Book of Mormon Cumorah."

8-)

[moparmonster1965]

More fancy word-speak to say we don't know where anything is from the BOM, but we know it happened because it's in the book. I say self-fulfilling prophesy.

[PolishAbinadi]

Let me put it in less fancy way:

We don't know for sure where the Book of Mormon events took place!

We keep saying this for years. You can choose to believe only if scientific evidence convinces you - I respect it. I hope you can also respect our right to trust God and "not rely on the arm of flesh".

The sad thing though is that if you lived 200 years ago or earlier - you would also reject the Bible because there was NOT ONE evidence of anything that it contains.

[moparmonster1965]

around with the plates for a while, and no claim that they had been stolen or moved. Theres no implication that it was anything but the plates were put in the ground by Moroni and dug up by Smith.

The fact that Hill Cumorah is indeed in New York is confirmed by the church; theres not only a Hill Cumorah visitors center, but a huge statue of Moroni at the top. They also hold a pageant in celebration there every year.

This then begs the question: where is the evidence?

[moparmonster1965]

hill of considerable size, and the most elevated of any in the neighborhood. On the west side of the hill, not far from the top, under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a stone box. (BOM, 7/96, p.6-7)

We know that Moroni, in life, hid the plates on Hill Cumorah after the battle had wiped out almost all of the Nephites, all of the Jaredites, and some 240,000 Lamanites.

Theres no mention of another Hill Cumorah, not one word of Moroni wandering

[moparmonster1965]

Okay, I missed where you said you didn't know where it was, so here's my response.

The morning after his visit with Moroni, JS fell as he was climbing over a fence, knocking himself out. When he came to, he saw Moroni again, who told him to go to his father and tell him about the visions, which he did.

Convenient to the village of Manchester, Ontario county, New York, stands

[PolishAbinadi]

"we know about...the thorough revision of the BOM..."

Before you make a fool out of yourself - please check first what those "thorough revisions" were.

For example - Joseph Smith removed from the 2nd editions a few "and"s because he realized that some sentences were grammatically incorrect. Years later scholars found out that the first edition contained Hebrew grammar.

Were there revisions? Yes. And they are another evidence that the Book of Mormon is true.

[moparmonster1965]

The revisions go far beyond a few ands and ifs. You're of course aware that there are words such as phrensied, awaked, arriven, numerority, and exceeding fraid, correct? There also changes in pluralization, tense, and word usage. This makes the book seem as if if were written by an uneducated farm boy.

[moparmonster1965]

You say that the church doesn't claim its prophets to be perfect. Not true:

"The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray." (Gospel Principles, p. 49-50)

This passage states exactly that. Since all apostles and prophets speak for the same God and we know that God's words and decrees don't change, there should be no contradictions. This is blatantly untrue.

[PolishAbinadi]

The quote you gave actually comes from our scriptures - Doctrine and Covenants and it is very true. The prophet will never lead us astray.

Our prophets have said numerous times that we are not bound as a people to do anything that isn't presented as revelation (which means it has to be approved by all apostles and then by the general membership of the Church).

Ex.: If a prophet says: "I am a Republican." and then "Members should vote according to their conscience." - isn't this clear?

[moparmonster1965]

Right, GP quotes D&C. Id din't note that.

I've known Democrat Mormons, too, so the anaology may or may not fit. Your example is a verbal slight-of-hand, an exhortation to do something without having said specifically to do it.

[AxelRun]

This is a very important view on the leaders of the church of Jesus christ and you have explained it well and clear. Thank you for this welldone video.

[lds9999]

This is an important topic. I think all LDS members understand this concept, yet our critics don't. It's ironic that they want to put our leaders on the same pedastol as Jesus by demanding perfection of them, but we as LDS would never do that. We understand that they are imperfect men, called of God, doing the best they can.

[PolishAbinadi]

Read the whole chapter to see that he is not putting himself above Jesus. Here is another quote by Joseph Smith: "Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing: the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature, like other men. No man lives without fault. Do you think that even Jesus, if he were here, would be without fault in your eyes? His enemies said all manner of evil against him-they all watched for iniquity in him."

[AKEVELFAN]

"Lucifer wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to 'do their own thinking.'...  "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan — it is God's plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy." (Improvement Era, June 1945, p. 354)

[PolishAbinadi]

This is such a true quote. We believe that our prophets will never lead us astray. It doesn't meant they have to be perfect though. I am sure Noah wasn't perfect, but only those who believed his crazy ideas about building the ark in the middle of dry land survived (I guess flood was a way for God to use "Block User" option - I think I will follow Him).

[AKEVELFAN]

Spam ? I'm not selling anything.

I thought Mormons were honest. Can't handle a little debate, huh ?

Go grab a copy of "History of the Church" or Journal of Discourses from YOUR OWN CHURCH LIBRARY and prove me wrong !

[lds9999]

Spam has nothing to do with "selling anything."

Haha, are you trying to have a debate here? Or on any of the other videos that you're spamming? No. You drop your 15-20 messages and then leave. You don't engage in any real discussion.

[PolishAbinadi]

I think we can "handle a little debate", but as I experienced some Communism in my earlier life I have a hard time handling propaganda and manipulation. Plus - the whole point of my video was that prophets are human and make mistakes. If you want to argue - why don't you prove me wrong - show me one biblical prophet for examp. who was perfect (besides Jesus of course). Instead - you spread your hateful, Anti-Mormon propag. making no point that relates to the video (accept confirming it I guess).

[lds9999]

I should add that I've marked your comments as spam and encourage others to do so as well, since that's what they are.

[PolishAbinadi]

Good idea - I just wasted a good hour just reading manipulative and hateful comments by AKEVELFAN. I will give him another day to write more comments and block him. (Perhaps in the next few hours he will copy and paste the rest of History of the Church - or at least those parts he seems to have a hard time to understand).

[lds9999]

Awesome, looks like you spam lots of videos, not just mine. And looks like it's the exact same messages.

Haha, wow.

[AKEVELFAN]

"So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:17-20)

[AKEVELFAN]

FLDS and LDS "Prophet" Joseph SMith was not just one of your leaders, he founded your church and wrote your scripturesm, including the Joseph Smith Translation of the bible that Brigham Young has rejected as fraud.

[PolishAbinadi]

Correction: Joseph Smith was never a leader or founder of the FLDS Church (which was established when Joseph Smith's grandkids were getting old).

Also - yes, Joseph Smith was an important prophet and guess what: HE WAS NOT A GOD (neither was Peter who denied Christ and sunk in the depths of the sea like a... rock because of his unbelief). All prophets were human! Isn't it wonderful that God is so awesome that he can accomplish great things using "weak things of the earth"?!

[AKEVELFAN]

"The Mormons claimed that Joseph Smith's power as a "seer" extended even beyond the earth. In February 1881 Oliver B. Huntington recorded the following in his journal:

Inhabitants of the Moon are more of a uniform size than the inhabitants of the Earth, being about 6 feet in height. They dress very much like the quaker Style & are quite general in Style, or the one fashion of dress. They live to be very old; comeing [sic] generally, near a thousand years."

[PolishAbinadi]

Do you realize that Joseph Smith had been dead for 37 years in 1881? I don't believe you were serious quoting some guy apparently quoting Joseph Smith almost 40 years after he was dead and blaming Joseph Smith for it.

[AKEVELFAN]

Deuteronomy 18:22 (King James Version) 22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

[AKEVELFAN]

• "President Smith then stated that the meeting had been called, because God had commanded it; and it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit. . . . it was the will of God that they should be ordained to the ministry and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh — even fifty six years should wind up the scene." (History of the Church, Vol. 2, page 182). Joseph Smith in 1835. The fifty-six years were passed by 1891.

[PolishAbinadi]

Yes - the fifty-six years were passed by 1891 and Brother Joseph was right - the scene was wind up. If you read the history of the LDS Church you will realize that some very important things happened in and around 1891 that totally changed the scene of the preparation for the Second Coming of the Lord.

[PolishAbinadi]

Also - even if this prophecy was not fulfilled - it would just prove my point. Read again the quote you posted: "When a prophet speaketh IN THE NAME OF THE LORD..." Can a prophet speak not in the name of the Lord? There is a huge difference between prophecy and speculation. Prophets are prophets when they prophecy but they sometimes speculate too and sometimes thy are wrong. Well - they aren't gods.

[AKEVELFAN]

False prophecies in the "Name of the Lord" of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and others are blatant.

Deuteronomy 18:22 (King James Version) 22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.