Maybe it's time to go ahead and write off the next generation completely?
Watch this video, especially starting around 2:30.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=11&v=q1esI8cbCtc
Notice, they don't even quote Joseph and Oliver:
There is a direct conflict between these statements and the statements about the stone-in-a-hat.
The revisionist Church historians choose to disbelieve Oliver Cowdery.
Some people choose to disbelieve the stone-in-a-hat statements.
The obvious way to reconcile the accounts is that Joseph used the stone-in-a-hat to demonstrate how the translation worked, not that he was demonstrating the actual translation.
I discussed this here:
http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/06/m2c-impact-on-church-history.html
Watch this video, especially starting around 2:30.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=11&v=q1esI8cbCtc
Notice, they don't even quote Joseph and Oliver:
Two days after the
arrival of Mr. Cowdery (being the 7th of April) I commenced to translate the
Book of Mormon, and he began to write for me. JS-H 1:67
Day after day I continued,
uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and
Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or
record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’
(Note after JS-H 1:75, excepted from Letter I, Messenger and Advocate, vol. 1 (October 1834), pp. 14-16.
There is a direct conflict between these statements and the statements about the stone-in-a-hat.
The revisionist Church historians choose to disbelieve Oliver Cowdery.
Some people choose to disbelieve the stone-in-a-hat statements.
The obvious way to reconcile the accounts is that Joseph used the stone-in-a-hat to demonstrate how the translation worked, not that he was demonstrating the actual translation.
I discussed this here:
http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/06/m2c-impact-on-church-history.html
No comments:
Post a Comment