FAIR - Book of Mormon Translation - Stone in a Hat

  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:7f0f31b379ac308b88219e86f20d5b22' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>by SpongeBob SquareGarments May 2012</p>\n<p>On March 29 &amp; 30 of 2012, there was a live presentation held at the Utah Valley University entitled \'Mormonism and the Internet\'. In Scott Gordon\'s presentation at the 41:07 mark he has a slide that says \"Translation with a Hat\". He then lists 5 LDS sources that he claims states that Joseph translated the Book of Mormon with a hat.</p>\n<p>Guest speakers included LDS true believers, FAIR apologist Scott Gordon as well as non-traditional believers like Joanna Brooks and John Dehlin.<br />\nyoutube: <a href=\"http://mormonstories.org/uvu-mormonism-and-the-internet-john-dehlin-scott-gordon-fair-and-rosemary-avance/\" title=\"http://mormonstories.org/uvu-mormonism-and-the-internet-john-dehlin-scott-gordon-fair-and-rosemary-avance/\">http://mormonstories.org/uvu-mormonism-and-the-internet-john-dehlin-scot...</a></p>\n<p>In reviewing the presentation, we noticed a significant error in the presentation made by Scott Gordon (President of FAIR):</p>\n<p>I looked them up and 3 of the references do not even say the word \"hat\". They talk about the translation but do not say he put his face in a hat, which is the issue:</p>\n<p>He lists:</p>\n<p>Ensign Jan 97, pg 36 (NO HAT MENTIONED)</p>\n<p>Ensign, Jul 93, pg 61 (HAT IS MENTIONED)</p>\n<p>Ensign, Jan 88, pg 6-13 (NO HAT MENTIONED)</p>\n<p>Ensign, Sep 77. pg 79 (HAT MENTIONED)</p>\n<p>Friend, Sep 1974, 7 (NO HAT MENTIONED)</p>\n<p>If FAIR wants to claim that the critics are wrong, when they say that the church isn\'t forthcoming in much of its history like the actual Book of Mormon translation process, and attempt to prove this by showing 5 examples taken from the church, they should at least be truthful in the sources they use as examples. Only twice was the word \"hat\" mentioned. Take in mind that the title of FAIR\'s presentation is \'Translation with a Hat\'. Hat is the keyword here.</p>\n<p>Looking at the two times the word \"hat\" was actually used in the articles discussing the BOM translation, one was 19 years ago and the other was 35 years ago. The church has of course had many opportunities to mention the \"stone in the hat\" method in the many articles and images used in its publications over the last 35 years, but to only mention hat twice and to have ever single image showing Joseph actually using the plates while translating with no image of his face in the hat is very misleading.</p>\n<p>Good thing someone is checking FAIR\'s facts!</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Heresy<br />\nNice research! You can\'t trust them for a minute.&nbsp;</p>\n<hr />\n<p>The Man in Black<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nFAIR is such an ironic acronym for what they do.</p>\n<p>Years ago as a TBM I read 1984 and when I read the definition of doublethink --believing two contradictory facts simultaniously and believing both to be true -- I understood it, \"What fools!\" I thought.</p>\n<p>While I understood the definition what I did not understand was the application. I thought that doublethink, like the Orwell\'s dystopia, was fiction. I now realize that while the world was fiction doublethink is entirely real and up until quite recently I was engaged in it myself.</p>\n<p>To doublethink there is one factor not well articulated in Orwell\'s work and there is an element that only experience can teach. Individuals trapped in a double mindset are perfectly capable of recognition of the folly of doublethink, and can observe it in other people, but are entirly unaware that they are themselves participants. Even when pointed out directly to them that they are doing it, the suggestion is dismissed and the process self-reinforces by intentional selection of the most convinient current truth.</p>\n<p>Anyway I got on the Orwell thing because they call themselves FAIR and frankly that\'s the best possible name for them once it becomes clear that a dystopia is exactly what you had been living in the whole time.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Jesus Smith<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nGood job, spongey. Yet...What does it really matter if ldsinc admits a couple of times decades ago that it was a stone in a hat, if they keep selling the urim&amp;thummin stories in their latest editions?</p>\n<p><a href=\"http://www.lds.org/liahona/2011/10/the-prophet-joseph-smith-translator-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng&amp;query=thummim\" title=\"http://www.lds.org/liahona/2011/10/the-prophet-joseph-smith-translator-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng&amp;query=thummim\">http://www.lds.org/liahona/2011/10/the-prophet-joseph-smith-translator-o...</a></p>\n<p>Thummin shows up hundreds of times in a search of manuals at LSD.org<br />\n<a href=\"http://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&amp;query=thummim&amp;sortBy=date\" title=\"http://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&amp;query=thummim&amp;sortBy=date\">http://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&amp;query=thummim&amp;sortBy=date</a></p>\n<p>This is exactly the kind of crap that I vented about yesterday: </p>\n<p>These are the lies at FAIR that annoy me most new</p>\n<p>FAIR follows the pattern of the lawyers in the church (like Oaks). Most of their tactics can be summarized as legal-type maneuvers. They argue away issues with convoluted nuance, and anyone who claims coverup is told that they didn’t read the fine print. (The church has published about the BoA, polygamy, the versions of the 1st vision, the stone in hat trick, etc. but only once and usually in obscure places/ways.)</p>\n<p>Yes, after acknowledging the weirder parts of history and doctrine, LDSinc continues going back to the standard fit for member consumption teachings that show Joseph &amp; Briggy in the best light. If you cry that you were misled, FAIR will trot out old New Era or other articles showing that once in the past the church DID acknowledge the actual history. FAIR doesn\'t seem to worry that the church returned back and continues teaching the old lies. It\'s all kosher as long as some point in the past it was acknowledged (fine print).</p>\n<p>Imagine if you did this with your spouse: admit once that you slept with someone, and then refuse to acknowledge it ever again in the future. Think your spouse will shrug it off just because at one point you admitted it, even if you lie about it thereafter?</p>\n<p>Bottom line: FAIR lies because it allows the church to continue to lie as long as it quietly admits its issues once in the past.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>The Man in Black<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nAlso Ministry of Information might be a tad too obvious for an organization whose sole existence is to rewrite history.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>caedmon<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nIn the LDS publication \"Gospel Principles\", Chapter 31 entitled \"Honesty\" we read:</p>\n<p>Lying is intentionally deceiving others. Bearing false witness is one form of lying. The Lord gave this commandment to the children of Israel: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” (Exodus 20:16). Jesus also taught this when He was on earth (see Matthew 19:18). There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.</p>\n<p>The Lord is not pleased with such dishonesty, and we will have to account for our lies. Satan would have us believe it is all right to lie. He says, “Yea, lie a little; … there is no harm in this” (2 Nephi 28:8). Satan encourages us to justify our lies to ourselves. Honest people will recognize Satan’s temptations and will speak the whole truth, even if it seems to be to their disadvantage.</p>\n<p>Does FAIR or the LDS Church meet this test of honesty?</p>\n<hr />\nSpongeBob SquareGarments<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\ntiptoes Wrote:<br />\n-------------------------------------------------------<br />\n&gt; What did they cite for JS polygamy?\n<p>It\'s right before the translation in the hat section - at about the 40 min mark. I didn\'t bother looking them up - they may be legit in merely mentioning that Joseph married other women.</p>\n<p>But I doubt they mention the truly disturbing parts of Joseph\'s polygamy such as him marrying 11 women that already had husbands, his marrying teenage girls as young as 14 and his coercision of getting them to marry him by promising them and their families eternal salvation. I also doubt they admit even the possibility that he probably had sex with those women as even some of the apologists suggest. And I doubt they mention that when Joseph practiced polygamy he was violating the law. I doubt they mention that he lied about it and got others to lie about it, etc., etc., etc.</p>\n<hr />\nzeezrom<br />\n\"Does FAIR or the LDS Church meet this test of honesty?\"<br />\nNo they do not. Not at all.\n<p>The Mormon Church Leadership, CES, FAIR and all the other LDS cult leadership spin off BS organisations are dishonest.</p>\n<p>The LDS publication Gospel Principles? It\'s authors are basically Conmen IMO, Is it CES?. Do they work for the church, paid by the church? Then IMO they are lying for money if thats the case.</p>\n<p>On page 29 under the Chapter heading Baptism they quote Matthew 28:19-20 and have left out the latter half of the quote.</p>\n<p>I\'ve emphasised in CAPITALS what they left out.</p>\n<p>Matthew 28:19-20<br />\n\"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: AND, LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD. AMEN.\"</p>\n<p>It seems the promise of Christ that he would always be with his Disciples etc even unto the end of the world doesn\'t quiet suit the bogus LDS apostasy claim so they purposely miss it out.</p>\n<p>As far as I am concerned LDS Prophets and Apostles are just Imposters and a facade and don\'t deserve my time and money for their crap services.</p>\n<hr />\nAmIDarkNow?<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nFAIR misleading folks by providing lots of bogus/kindasorta references so it looks like the church is always telling its members the truth? Say it ain’t so!\n<p>I call BULLSHIT on their despicable half truths and shxtty (if you got a poo load of references then it must be rock solid right? Stupid uninformed anti-mormons!) references trying to make themselves all scholarly like to the faithful who won’t spend a second fact checking sqwat!</p>\n<p>I deplore the way an ignorant but faithful mormom will place the dishonest mormon apologists on a pedestal and let them do all the work for them so they can sit back and say,“See all you non-believing anti-mormons out there. We got Brother John Dishonest Fact Omitting Duffus who has addressed your silly little criticism that was Satan inspired. Critics are liars. Go away and bother us no more!”</p>\n<p>What really pisses me off is that I used to be one of them. GoD freaking dangit its frustrating as you can see from my post.</p>\n<p>Seriously people! My ex made sure we had a subscription to all the church magazines. None were cracked by six of us.<br />\nMostly they were for visitors and for the Ex. Schooling the mass of the faithful can only be done at conference or in the Sunday lesson manuals.</p>\n<p>If any of the faithful give a flying @#$%&amp; about the real truths they must keep their mouth shut, work in fear in private while they are doing their own research.</p>\n<p>They will never disseminate freely the whole truth in Primary, Sunday School, Relief Society, Priesthood or over the pulpit in Sacrament meeting because the truth is just not faith promoting.<br />\nTell the whole damn church! Not just in magazines that a few pay money for and then don’t read.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>zeezrom<br />\nRe: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.<br />\nHas anyone challenged Scott Gordon\'s Errors in his presentation?</p>\n<p>Personally I dislike his FAIR organization very much.</p>\n<hr />\nfacsimile3<br />\nThese are the lies at FAIR that annoy me most new\n<p>You are giving the Church too much credit. When they disclose information on an uncomfortable topic, they never do so in a full and honest manner. Here are three examples off the top of my head:</p>\n<p>1. The Ensign article disclosure on the Book of Abraham (by Michael Rhodes, I think) mentions the disconnect between the recovered papyri and the BoA, but then goes on to assert that the BoA must have come from a section of the papyri that is still missing. He claims that the red text mentioned by Oliver Cowdery on the original scrolls cannot be found on the Book of Breathings papyrus, while dishonestly using an ellipse to exclude the \"Book of Joseph\" from Cowdery quote. Of course, the \"Book of Joseph\" has since been identified as the Book of the Dead papyri which were in the same recovered collection and which do contain red text.</p>\n<p>2. The Ensign article disclosure on changes to the D&amp;C revelations only provided a few examples of minor edits. The important changes regarding the restoration of the priesthood, Oliver\'s rod of nature, and Joseph\'s one and only one gift are not mentioned.</p>\n<p>3. The Ensign article disclosure on the Kinderhook Plates is the closest thing to complete, but the author leaves the reader thinking that William Clayton is just some guy spreading rumors instead of properly identifying him as Joseph Smith\'s personal secretary and recorder of Church history.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>\"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org\"</p>\n', created = 1490456181, expire = 1490542581, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:7f0f31b379ac308b88219e86f20d5b22' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 112.

by SpongeBob SquareGarments May 2012

On March 29 & 30 of 2012, there was a live presentation held at the Utah Valley University entitled 'Mormonism and the Internet'. In Scott Gordon's presentation at the 41:07 mark he has a slide that says "Translation with a Hat". He then lists 5 LDS sources that he claims states that Joseph translated the Book of Mormon with a hat.

Guest speakers included LDS true believers, FAIR apologist Scott Gordon as well as non-traditional believers like Joanna Brooks and John Dehlin.
youtube: http://mormonstories.org/uvu-mormonism-and-the-internet-john-dehlin-scot...

In reviewing the presentation, we noticed a significant error in the presentation made by Scott Gordon (President of FAIR):

I looked them up and 3 of the references do not even say the word "hat". They talk about the translation but do not say he put his face in a hat, which is the issue:

He lists:

Ensign Jan 97, pg 36 (NO HAT MENTIONED)

Ensign, Jul 93, pg 61 (HAT IS MENTIONED)

Ensign, Jan 88, pg 6-13 (NO HAT MENTIONED)

Ensign, Sep 77. pg 79 (HAT MENTIONED)

Friend, Sep 1974, 7 (NO HAT MENTIONED)

If FAIR wants to claim that the critics are wrong, when they say that the church isn't forthcoming in much of its history like the actual Book of Mormon translation process, and attempt to prove this by showing 5 examples taken from the church, they should at least be truthful in the sources they use as examples. Only twice was the word "hat" mentioned. Take in mind that the title of FAIR's presentation is 'Translation with a Hat'. Hat is the keyword here.

Looking at the two times the word "hat" was actually used in the articles discussing the BOM translation, one was 19 years ago and the other was 35 years ago. The church has of course had many opportunities to mention the "stone in the hat" method in the many articles and images used in its publications over the last 35 years, but to only mention hat twice and to have ever single image showing Joseph actually using the plates while translating with no image of his face in the hat is very misleading.

Good thing someone is checking FAIR's facts!


Heresy
Nice research! You can't trust them for a minute. 


The Man in Black
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
FAIR is such an ironic acronym for what they do.

Years ago as a TBM I read 1984 and when I read the definition of doublethink --believing two contradictory facts simultaniously and believing both to be true -- I understood it, "What fools!" I thought.

While I understood the definition what I did not understand was the application. I thought that doublethink, like the Orwell's dystopia, was fiction. I now realize that while the world was fiction doublethink is entirely real and up until quite recently I was engaged in it myself.

To doublethink there is one factor not well articulated in Orwell's work and there is an element that only experience can teach. Individuals trapped in a double mindset are perfectly capable of recognition of the folly of doublethink, and can observe it in other people, but are entirly unaware that they are themselves participants. Even when pointed out directly to them that they are doing it, the suggestion is dismissed and the process self-reinforces by intentional selection of the most convinient current truth.

Anyway I got on the Orwell thing because they call themselves FAIR and frankly that's the best possible name for them once it becomes clear that a dystopia is exactly what you had been living in the whole time.


Jesus Smith
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
Good job, spongey. Yet...What does it really matter if ldsinc admits a couple of times decades ago that it was a stone in a hat, if they keep selling the urim&thummin stories in their latest editions?

http://www.lds.org/liahona/2011/10/the-prophet-joseph-smith-translator-o...

Thummin shows up hundreds of times in a search of manuals at LSD.org
http://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&query=thummim&sortBy=date

This is exactly the kind of crap that I vented about yesterday:

These are the lies at FAIR that annoy me most new

FAIR follows the pattern of the lawyers in the church (like Oaks). Most of their tactics can be summarized as legal-type maneuvers. They argue away issues with convoluted nuance, and anyone who claims coverup is told that they didn’t read the fine print. (The church has published about the BoA, polygamy, the versions of the 1st vision, the stone in hat trick, etc. but only once and usually in obscure places/ways.)

Yes, after acknowledging the weirder parts of history and doctrine, LDSinc continues going back to the standard fit for member consumption teachings that show Joseph & Briggy in the best light. If you cry that you were misled, FAIR will trot out old New Era or other articles showing that once in the past the church DID acknowledge the actual history. FAIR doesn't seem to worry that the church returned back and continues teaching the old lies. It's all kosher as long as some point in the past it was acknowledged (fine print).

Imagine if you did this with your spouse: admit once that you slept with someone, and then refuse to acknowledge it ever again in the future. Think your spouse will shrug it off just because at one point you admitted it, even if you lie about it thereafter?

Bottom line: FAIR lies because it allows the church to continue to lie as long as it quietly admits its issues once in the past.


The Man in Black
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
Also Ministry of Information might be a tad too obvious for an organization whose sole existence is to rewrite history.


caedmon
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
In the LDS publication "Gospel Principles", Chapter 31 entitled "Honesty" we read:

Lying is intentionally deceiving others. Bearing false witness is one form of lying. The Lord gave this commandment to the children of Israel: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” (Exodus 20:16). Jesus also taught this when He was on earth (see Matthew 19:18). There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

The Lord is not pleased with such dishonesty, and we will have to account for our lies. Satan would have us believe it is all right to lie. He says, “Yea, lie a little; … there is no harm in this” (2 Nephi 28:8). Satan encourages us to justify our lies to ourselves. Honest people will recognize Satan’s temptations and will speak the whole truth, even if it seems to be to their disadvantage.

Does FAIR or the LDS Church meet this test of honesty?


SpongeBob SquareGarments
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
tiptoes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What did they cite for JS polygamy?

It's right before the translation in the hat section - at about the 40 min mark. I didn't bother looking them up - they may be legit in merely mentioning that Joseph married other women.

But I doubt they mention the truly disturbing parts of Joseph's polygamy such as him marrying 11 women that already had husbands, his marrying teenage girls as young as 14 and his coercision of getting them to marry him by promising them and their families eternal salvation. I also doubt they admit even the possibility that he probably had sex with those women as even some of the apologists suggest. And I doubt they mention that when Joseph practiced polygamy he was violating the law. I doubt they mention that he lied about it and got others to lie about it, etc., etc., etc.


zeezrom
"Does FAIR or the LDS Church meet this test of honesty?"
No they do not. Not at all.

The Mormon Church Leadership, CES, FAIR and all the other LDS cult leadership spin off BS organisations are dishonest.

The LDS publication Gospel Principles? It's authors are basically Conmen IMO, Is it CES?. Do they work for the church, paid by the church? Then IMO they are lying for money if thats the case.

On page 29 under the Chapter heading Baptism they quote Matthew 28:19-20 and have left out the latter half of the quote.

I've emphasised in CAPITALS what they left out.

Matthew 28:19-20
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: AND, LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD. AMEN."

It seems the promise of Christ that he would always be with his Disciples etc even unto the end of the world doesn't quiet suit the bogus LDS apostasy claim so they purposely miss it out.

As far as I am concerned LDS Prophets and Apostles are just Imposters and a facade and don't deserve my time and money for their crap services.


AmIDarkNow?
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
FAIR misleading folks by providing lots of bogus/kindasorta references so it looks like the church is always telling its members the truth? Say it ain’t so!

I call BULLSHIT on their despicable half truths and shxtty (if you got a poo load of references then it must be rock solid right? Stupid uninformed anti-mormons!) references trying to make themselves all scholarly like to the faithful who won’t spend a second fact checking sqwat!

I deplore the way an ignorant but faithful mormom will place the dishonest mormon apologists on a pedestal and let them do all the work for them so they can sit back and say,“See all you non-believing anti-mormons out there. We got Brother John Dishonest Fact Omitting Duffus who has addressed your silly little criticism that was Satan inspired. Critics are liars. Go away and bother us no more!”

What really pisses me off is that I used to be one of them. GoD freaking dangit its frustrating as you can see from my post.

Seriously people! My ex made sure we had a subscription to all the church magazines. None were cracked by six of us.
Mostly they were for visitors and for the Ex. Schooling the mass of the faithful can only be done at conference or in the Sunday lesson manuals.

If any of the faithful give a flying @#$%& about the real truths they must keep their mouth shut, work in fear in private while they are doing their own research.

They will never disseminate freely the whole truth in Primary, Sunday School, Relief Society, Priesthood or over the pulpit in Sacrament meeting because the truth is just not faith promoting.
Tell the whole damn church! Not just in magazines that a few pay money for and then don’t read.


zeezrom
Re: FAIR tries to get one past the audience again.
Has anyone challenged Scott Gordon's Errors in his presentation?

Personally I dislike his FAIR organization very much.


facsimile3
These are the lies at FAIR that annoy me most new

You are giving the Church too much credit. When they disclose information on an uncomfortable topic, they never do so in a full and honest manner. Here are three examples off the top of my head:

1. The Ensign article disclosure on the Book of Abraham (by Michael Rhodes, I think) mentions the disconnect between the recovered papyri and the BoA, but then goes on to assert that the BoA must have come from a section of the papyri that is still missing. He claims that the red text mentioned by Oliver Cowdery on the original scrolls cannot be found on the Book of Breathings papyrus, while dishonestly using an ellipse to exclude the "Book of Joseph" from Cowdery quote. Of course, the "Book of Joseph" has since been identified as the Book of the Dead papyri which were in the same recovered collection and which do contain red text.

2. The Ensign article disclosure on changes to the D&C revelations only provided a few examples of minor edits. The important changes regarding the restoration of the priesthood, Oliver's rod of nature, and Joseph's one and only one gift are not mentioned.

3. The Ensign article disclosure on the Kinderhook Plates is the closest thing to complete, but the author leaves the reader thinking that William Clayton is just some guy spreading rumors instead of properly identifying him as Joseph Smith's personal secretary and recorder of Church history.


"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org"