Mormons

Originally posted by ushomefree
Shakyamunison-

The letter in question--regardless of websites presenting it--was written by the Anthropology Smithsonian Institution, and therefore, is irrelevant. Again, who cares about the websites?! The letter speaks for "itself"--the Anthropology Smithsonian Institution. This has nothing to do with Christian propaganda; stop being ridiculous.

You seem to be insensitive to the feelings of other people on this thread. You should have cut and pasted the letter so Mormons would not have to go to a web site that was insinuating that they are not "saved". Being "saved" is important to Mormons.

Regret-

I will give the article a fair read. Thank you.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Shakyamunison-

The letter in question--regardless of websites presenting it--was written by the Anthropology Smithsonian Institution, and therefore, is irrelevant. Again, who cares about the websites?! The letter speaks for "itself"--the Anthropology Smithsonian Institution. This has nothing to do with Christian propaganda; stop being ridiculous.

The Anthropology Smithsonian Institute?

Originally posted by ushomefree
Please read, "Smithsonian Letter regarding Book of Mormon."

Taken from your site above:

STATEMENT REGARDING THE BOOK OF MORMON

...

5. Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (except for occasional use of unsmelted meteoric iron). Native copper was worked in various locations in pre- Columbian times, but true metallurgy was limited to southern Mexico and the Andean region, where its occurrence in late prehistoric times involved gold, silver, copper, and their alloys,but not iron.

Here is an interesting article:

Archaeologist 'Strikes Gold' With Finds Of Ancient Nasca Iron Ore Mine In Peru

...
The researchers determined that the mine is a human-made cave that was first created around 2,000 years ago.

...

Originally posted by Regret
Given his reception from the people in the areas back east, including the government, I do doubt the validity of the claims. Now, I do know that these accusations exist, but show me where he was found guilty of such, these are more difficult to find due to their lack of existence.

Back East? What are you, living in the '50s? Oh...yeah, I guess you are.

He was tried twice, was he not? In 1830 and 1826.

These are a matter of public record.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Being "saved" is important to Mormons.

Lol, yes. Too bad I'm not Buddhist...life would be easier.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The header of the web site says:

"Bringing the biblical Jesus to the Latter-day Saints"

I get the feeling, without even reading anything from the site, that they have a bias.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Who cares about the website?! Just read the letter.

As you can tell, ushomfree, Shaky is not one of those push over bible thumpers from the south who will hop at any chance to Mormon bash.

Originally posted by Quark_666
Lol, yes. Too bad I'm not Buddhist...life would be easier.

Originally posted by chickenlover98
ya it would be for you. you dont have to feel bad about eating choclate ecclairs anymore, as your religion's patron saint is some fat guy

🙄 That was wrong in so many ways...

Originally posted by Devil King
Back East? What are you, living in the '50s? Oh...yeah, I guess you are.

He was tried twice, was he not? In 1830 and 1826.

These are a matter of public record.

Joseph Smith was acquitted in the 1830 trial at South Bainbridge, N.Y.

Also, tried does not equal guilt. He was not found guilty.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
🙄 That was wrong in so many ways...

i know, but being politically incorrect is fun in so many ways 😄

Originally posted by chickenlover98
ya it would be for you. you dont have to feel bad about eating choclate ecclairs anymore, as your religion's patron saint is some fat guy

I'm a new convert!!!

Originally posted by Quark_666
I'm a new convert!!!

Originally posted by chickenlover98
see shaky, if your religion would just openly say stuff bout choclate ecclairs, you'd have many many more converts

I was more delighted about the patron saint!

Originally posted by Quark_666
I was more delighted about the patron saint!

some big fat guy?

Originally posted by chickenlover98
some big fat guy?

Yep. I'm trying to fatten up.

Originally posted by Regret
The 1826 trial It appears the 1826 trial is not well documented. They did not even record the goings on of trials for misdemeanors at this time, which is what this was, see the attached image below.

Joseph Smith was acquitted in the 1830 trial at South Bainbridge, N.Y.

Also, tried does not equal guilt. He was not found guilty.

I don't get why people think that was a talking point against our church

Originally posted by Regret
Also, tried does not equal guilt. He was not found guilty.

One more time.

Originally posted by Regret
Also, tried does not equal guilt. He was not found guilty.

Joseph Smith himself talked about bogus trials being brought up against him...this does nothing for the "hate the Mormons" side...it only hurts their side.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Joseph Smith himself talked about bogus trials being brought up against him...this does nothing for the "hate the Mormons" side...it only hurts their side.

Being aquitted doesn't mean your innocent, either.

It's the black people don't have souls and the Native Americans being a lost tribe of Israel and the plethora of other batshit ideas that this con artist came up with that make it crazy.

But, I don't hate mormons, in fact, I think they suffer from the same delusions as any other christian sect.

Originally posted by Devil King
Being aquitted doesn't mean your innocent, either.

Acquit, definition - To pronounce not guilty of criminal charges.

Innocent, definition - Free from guilt.

Umm, duh?

Originally posted by Regret
Acquit, definition - To pronounce not guilty of criminal charges.

Innocent, definition - Free from guilt.

Umm, duh?