I do not think that GOD would say something wrong to Joseph and then say the opposite in later “revelations”.

I guess that’s the kicker then: trying to determine what is wrong among all that Joseph Smith said God told him.

(PS: Kim, I hate to be a nag but it’s hearsay, not “heresay.” Please accept my apology in advance for being annoying.)

I’ve never heard anyone in Christian circles anywhere claim to believe in unicorns. Do you have any evidence if this? I bet you don’t. You, admittedly, just pressume it. I’d be surprised to learn about, as would most of the planet, a Christian who actually believes in unicorns.

I didn’t say Christians believe in unicorns. I said that if they can support the biblical idea of unicorns, they should be able too allow for the similar usage of actual animals.

It’s already been established in previous comments that Christians don’t believe “unicorn” to be the most accurate word in this instance and actually represents another animal altogether.

I’m not a God, what makes you think I have that sort of power?

What are you talking about? I never said you could do it. I asked for your opinion on how a god would do it.

How about starting by not wrapping it up in flowery language and allegory? That’d be a good start.

That’s hardly the problem, and I am surprised that would be your first suggestion. take the allegory of the olive tree in Jacob 5, for example. If there is a problem with anyone understanding it, it is because of a lack of understanding at all rather than misinterpreting it or misunderstanding its message.

Likewise, when there is misunderstanding in the Book of Mormon, I suggest it is in areas written plainly (Alma 39, for example).

But what we’re talking about is specific words given to Joseph to write down.

Right. So how does eliminating flowery words and allegory address this issue?

God should be able to accomplish that task perfectly.

Which task is that? Giving words to Joseph Smith? I don’t see how we can say he didn’t.

Two things we need to keep in mind.

First, Whitmer’s account is heresay. He was not involved in the translation process.

Second, assuming Whitmer’s account is an accurate portrayal of the process, without knowing God’s intent in his choosing the specific words he allegedly caused to show on the stone, we cannot say whether or not he accomplished the task perfectly.

You are making assumptions, Rick. You assume a third party account of heresay dictated decades after the event is an accurate portrayal of the translation process. You assume God’s intention correlates with your interpretation of the text.

Trying to create a logical argument based on assumptions is a difficult task to pull off well.

That’s actually a very good and thoughtful question, You have it within you Kim to be a thinker and communicate it responsibly.

Mind you, I’ve never heard anyone in Christian circles anywhere claim to believe in unicorns. Do you have any evidence if this? I bet you don’t. You, admittedly, just pressume it. I’d be surprised to learn about, as would most of the planet, a Christian who actually believes in unicorns.

Thanks again for provoking my thoughts.

Who said I couldn’t figure it out – my figuring it out differs from the the other peoples ‘figuring it out’ that’s all.

You know that when I say written by man, I mean authored and originating from man as well.

So do I. I think every word Nephi wrote was authored by him and originated from his mind and hand. I also think he was told by God to make a record of what he had seen and done. I also think God sometimes told him which parts he should write about.

I don’t know why you’re so bent on forcing us into a false dilemma between the Book of Mormon being either an absolutely flawless account dictated directly from the mouth of God and set down in language that is utterly impossible for any person to misinterpret, or a complete fraud. Your thinking isn’t usually that narrow.