Joseph Smith Fraud

[stillsearching]

I was just reading some on this and came across an article that addresses the Kinderhook plates that Autodidact brought up in this thread.

"Williams then turns to the Kinderhook plates, which are now lost except for one. Apparently uninformed regarding the Church's more recent determination of these plates, he claims Joseph Smith translated the inscription and never refers to the 1981 Ensign article which explains the history of the Church's role concerning the plates. It was quite some time before it was positively acknowledged by scholars, through an electronic and chemical analysis, that the one remaining plate is a hoax. More important, contrary to popular articles written by anti-Mormon writers, Joseph Smith did not make a translation of the fraudulent plate. The translation attributed to him has proven to be an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. In fact, after viewing the Kinderhook plate, Joseph Smith never showed any interest in it."

 

[Smoke]

"More important, contrary to popular articles written by anti-Mormon writers, Joseph Smith did not make a translation of the fraudulent plate. The translation attributed to him has proven to be an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. In fact, after viewing the Kinderhook plate, Joseph Smith never showed any interest in it."

I don't know who wrote that, but they're lying by mixing innuendo with half-truths. It's true that the translation attributed to Smith is from Clayton's journal. However, Clayton was hardly a hostile source. He was Smith's private secretary and remained a Mormon in good standing all his life. Moreover it was not "anti-Mormon writers," but Mormon writers working with the full approval of Church authorities, who paraphrased Clayton's third-person account to create a first-person account in Joseph's voice. Nor is Clayton's account the only evidence that Smith began a translation of the plates.

In fact, your author seems to be fudging the truth a bit by suggesting there was only one plate, or at least only one relevant plate.

 

[silvermoon383]

I've been staying out of this for several reasons: I'm not qualified to speak about any of this since I'm an engineer, not a historian, anthropologist, archeologist, or linguist, nothing I say will change anyone's minds, and this whole thing has a feeling of "here we go again..."

Thankfully, I'm familiar with people who are, and who have done the studies. Here's a compilation of some of the work done on the BoA, and it has plenty of links to more: Book of Abraham/Papyri/Long article - FAIRMormon

And on a personal note, I'd like to request that everyone watch this video before replying: Phil Plait - Don't Be A Dick on Vimeo

 

[Autodidact]

silvermoon: I don't do argument by link. Either make an argument, or don't.

 

[Autodidact]

To go back to the first, no, actually second hint that the whole thing is bogus, there's the convenient fact that the "angel" TOOK THE PLATES BACK! That would have been enough to turn me off. First he has this absolutely preposterous story, to which the natural response is: Can I see the plates? "Uh no, the angel took them back." Of course he did, Joseph.

 

[Autodidact]

Then there's the ridiculous appearance of the supposedly "Egytpian" script. Well, it was called Egyptian until an actual Egyptologist pointed out that it wasn't, when it suddenly morphed into conveniently "reformed" Egyptian:

I mean, give me a break, all you have to do is look at it to see how silly it is. It's like something a kid would make up.

 

[Autodidact]

So if we put these together (and we're not nearly done yet), Smith says the BoM is Egyptian, but conveniently doesn't have the plates. When we do have the original, we see that Smith has no idea what it is, and lied about it. That in itself should be enough to convict him, before we even touch on the ridiculous stuff he said was in the BoM.

 

[stillsearching]

And on a personal note, I'd like to request that everyone watch this video before replying: Phil Plait - Don't Be A Dick on Vimeo

In regards to this video, the title says a lot of it. It talks of being civil in bantering things rather than attacking.

 

[stillsearching]

So if we put these together (and we're not nearly done yet), Smith says the BoM is Egyptian, but conveniently doesn't have the plates. When we do have the original, we see that Smith has no idea what it is, and lied about it. That in itself should be enough to convict him, before we even touch on the ridiculous stuff he said was in the BoM.

I don't recall the BoM being claimed it was Egyptian. The Book of Abraham does have the Egyptian papyri, but that is not the BoM.

"When we do have the original, we see that Smith has no idea what it is, and lied about it. "
The original isn't and hasn't been available for him to deny.

 

[Autodidact]

I don't recall the BoM being claimed it was Egyptian. The Book of Abraham does have the Egyptian papyri, but that is not the BoM.

I make a record [the small plates of Nephi] in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians" (1 Ne. 1:2)

"When we do have the original, we see that Smith has no idea what it is, and lied about it. "

The original isn't and hasn't been available for him to deny.

I was referring there to the "Book of Abraham," which of course is no such thing. Once we found the original, it was determined as a certainty that Smith's bogus "translation" was nothing of the kind. It is reasonable to surmise that his purported "translation" of the non-existent "Book of Mormon" was equally fraudulent.

 

[Autodidact]

Backing up a bit, long before he claimed to have discovered a set of golden plates, Smith was in the habit of digging for buried treasure with a peep stone, and charging others for doing it for them. He was arrested and possibly convicted as a result of these activities.

 

[Autodidact]

btw, before this particular fraud was busted, the Book of Abraham was included as part of the LDS standard scriptural works.

 

[silvermoon383]

What do you mean "was"?

 

[Autodidact]

What do you mean "was"?

Omigod, from a Mormon point of view, it's worse than I thought!

Let me get this, Mormons. You include to this day among your scriptures material that has been proved beyond doubt to be completely and utterly bogus?!?! Hello...Mormons, what? Doesn't that bother you?

I've been arguing with Mormons here for years and did not know that.

How do you wrap your head around that? Seriously.

 

[silvermoon383]

You've been arguing with a group of people for years about something you didn't know the status of?

How do you wrap your head around that? Seriously.

(And if you took the time to read, you'd also know that the BoA has in no way been proved beyond doubt to be completely and utterly bogus)

 

[Autodidact]

You've been arguing with a group of people for years about something you didn't know the status of?

How do you wrap your head around that? Seriously.

(And if you took the time to read, you'd also know that the BoA has in no way been proved beyond doubt to be completely and utterly bogus)

Oh, not about that. The thing I've manage to learn a considerable amount about is the hilarious misrepresentation of the pre-European Americas that's contained in the BoM. I'm just learning about the "Book of Abraham" (or as it should be called, the Egyptian Book of the Dead) now.

Joseph Smith and Mormon literature is a never ending treasure trove of fraud through and through.

I'm interested for the same reason it makes me sad; as a perfect illustration of human gullibility.

If I could bear it, I could learn about Scientology, but that's even worse, and at the same time not yet as huge or mainstream.

Only a Mormon could take the facts and conclude anything other than pure fraud.

They buy the papyrus. Smith claims he can translate them. He comes up with a book supposedly written by Abraham 4000 years ago. Then we learn how to translate Egyptian, and unfortunately for the LDS leadership, the original papyrus shows up. It turns out to be nothing of the kind.

As I said, the only way you can conclude otherwise is if you're brainwashed to buy it from before the age of reason. I mean, c'mon people.

And that's without the "angel took the plates back" and the non-existent "Reformed Egyptian" that is nothing of the kind, and the hat + rocks translation methodology, and the prior history of fraudulent treasure seeking...and then you get to the content! Cureloms! Cumoms! Not to mention the horses, pigs, oxen, cows, elephants, camels, lions and goats. And the wheat, barley, figs and grapes. And the chariots, swords, silk, metallurgy. And the DNA.

It's completely, totally, utterly wrong in every way we know how to check. Nothing in it is supported by the archeological, linguistic or genetic evidence.

So it's not just one thing, it's the totality of the evidence. There's one simple explanation that explains each and every bit of the evidence. The man was a fraud.

 

[hummingbird09]

Because they are not.

The LDS church is a stain on humanity.

It is a political power that seeks to control the lives of others.

This is not "Good" by any definition I`m aware of .

To the Op:

BASH AWAY!!

If people on the internet took as much time as they do arguing with Mormons, Muslims, Christians, etc. and turned that to good, the world might actually be a better place.

 

[Smoke]

If people on the internet took as much time as they do arguing with Mormons, Muslims, Christians, etc. and turned that to good, the world might actually be a better place.

If Muslims and Christians (including Mormons) spent as much time doing good as they do attacking others, including each other, the world would be definitely be a better place.

 

[silvermoon383]

Here, I felt nice and pulled some research together for you: Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Animals - FAIRMormon

Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Chariots - FAIRMormon

Book of Mormon/DNA evidence/Summary - FAIRMormon

Book of Mormon/Warfare/Swords - FAIRMormon

Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Plants - FAIRMormon

Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Reformed Egyptian - FAIRMormon

Don't like reading links? Too bad, as I said earlier I'm an engineer, not an archeologist, so I have to rely on the work of those who are.

 

[Smoke]

Don't like reading links? Too bad, as I said earlier I'm an engineer, not an archeologist, so I have to rely on the work of those who are.

But you have contributed nothing to the discussion; you have merely furnished a reading list -- and that from a single website which is openly propagandistic in nature.

If you don't want to or are unable to discuss the subject at hand, there's no reason for anybody to complete your reading assignments or otherwise respond to your posts.