As Simon continues to distort the questions asked, I figured a good place to post dead ends would be here. I'll post the others later, but if you have threads that reached a dead end when the Mormon apologist runs away once cornered, I'd like to see the sources.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17070&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Kinderhook&start=315


viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17070&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Kinderhook&start=315


viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17070&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Kinderhook&start=336


And then we have this 180 turn today regarding who said the words about the descendant of Ham William Clayton wrote down when quoting "President J."...

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19064&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=63


So Simon, care to answer the question asked? Who said the words regarding the Kinderhook plates William Clayton wrote down? Note I already know who wrote them down, but I want you to acknowledge what you had said previously when you claimed you were "perfectly fine with accepting that he attempted" regarding Joseph Smith's mistake.

One last time Simon, who said the words that William Clayton wrote down regarding the descendant of Ham?

thews,

I've answered your question several times. Just because it isn't the exact answer you want to hear doesn't mean I haven't answered it.

William Clayton wrote in his journal that "President J." said those words.

Now, the question becomes this: Do you believe William Clayton was an honest man -- do you trust him?

If you do, then you should believe what he said as a believing Latter-day Saint. You should believe his testimony.

If you don't, then you should believe that he lied in his journal, too.

So which is it?

I sure that thews (correct me if I'm wrong, thews) takes William Clayton's word that he: A) believed that the Church was true, and B) believed that Joseph Smith was dictating to him.

And he was either right in both cases or wrong in both cases. We cannot cherry pick from history to support our agenda.

Of course we can. We can accept that his belief in Mormonism was mistaken. We can also accept what he heard with his own two ears.

It's much easier to accept things that people hear with their own two ears than it is to accept things that they merely believe that they nevertheless haven't seen nor heard.

The only way to know whether he heard something with his own two ears would be to actually be there.

Were you there?

Actually I'm sure that Thews (A) doesn't give a tinker's cuss what Clayton actually believed, and (B) merely assumes that Joseph dictated the words to Clayton, even though Clayton does not say that he was writing from dictation, and the structure of the writing precludes that possibility; but that assumption is serviceable to Thews' polemical agenda, so he dogmatically insists upon it.

Regards,
Pahoran

That is unknown.

As you know, Thews -- we've been over this ground before -- Clayton's journal entry was not dictated to him by anyone. He was writing down his own observations, not what anyone told him to write. Did Clayton personally hear Joseph say something to that effect? Possibly. Did a third person tell Clayton that Joseph had said something to that effect? Possibly. Do we have Joseph's exact words? No. Can we check against any other source to see how closely Clayton's journal entry matches what Joseph actually said? No.

Do you care about those considerations, or only about how best to exploit the Kinderhook Plates for polemical purposes?

I'll let you answer that question.

Regards,
Pahoran

Does Pahoran like smoke and mirrors? Yes.

Pahoran,

Shut the ____ up, you dirty [deleted]! You sorry ass excuse of a Mormon. Take the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3., and shove it right up your ass where they belong.

Paul Osborne

Paul,

Is that really you?

Well, yes, actually it is me, Dr. Scratch. I just couldn't resist the urge to come back and do a little flaming. I don't expect to participate too much but I would like to be able to take a stab once in a while. Pahoran needed to be told to ____ off and to take Facsimile No. 3 and shove it up his ass.

PS, the avatar is not me.

Paul O

Hmmm...I think you may need to make this point to LDS leaders and apologists (head cherry pickers)...

First Vision account - the scribe got it right
Joseph saw Adam AND Michael - the scribe got it wrong

You have not answered any question, nor have you acknowledged what you said. Just for you again Simon, you said...



You can continue your charade (Simon says) and just keep asking me the same question refusing to acknowledge your words, but it only makes you look like more of a fool than you already do. If you don't choose to be civil, then tuck tail again, but stop asking me the same question which I've already answered while you have not. If you claim you are not a sociopath and are capable of intellectually honest dialog, then acknowledge (define) what you said.

The question you have not answered: Who said the words William Clayton wrote down regarding the descendant of Ham? (insert answer to the question asked).

You said, "I am perfectly fine with accepting that he attempted, in good faith, thinking his gift applied to all encounters with supposed artifacts." Please acknowledge your own words claiming the aforementioned opinion of yours was acknowledging Joseph Smith did attempt to translate the Kinderhook plates, and tried (in good faith), thinking his "gift" applied to supposed artifacts. Why, when one acknowledges what you said, do you have such a problem answering a simple question. Who said the words Simon?

I've answered the question several times. So has Pahoran.

We don't know who said the words, or even if any words were said. All we know is what we have in William Clayton's journal entry.

You are a liar, cut/dry plain and simple. You said you were"perfectly fine" with Joseph Smith attempting a translation... do you now deny you said this? If you do, please explain, because you are in fact lying unless you attempt to worm out of what you said.

For the record, what Simon Belmont actually said:

I wonder if Simon would like to apply the above thinking to the Explanations of Fascimile No. 3 contained in the Book of Abraham -- a revelation and translation found in the scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

How about that, Simon? Did Joseph Smith say, "Shulem"? The answer is simple: Yes he did. Joseph Smith said a lot of dumb things to impress his followers. But we know now through modern Egyptology that Joseph Smith was faking a translation and at the least, his proposed translation was unsuccessful. Wouldn't you agree? Yes, Simon, Joseph Smith made the name up out of thin air and attempted to connect them with an ancient document that he knew no one could read, let alone him.

Joseph Smith was a liar that loved to ____ as many girls as often as he could get away with it. And he did that in the name of God!

Paul O

It's really good to have you back, Paul. I hope you've been well.

Thank you Dr. Scratch. I'm taking my hot little ass down to the club tonight to dance, drink, and God knows what else. And you're right, I never have to "pay" for it!

;-)

Paul O

thews, my opinion of something is very different from what we know.

What is my opinion? I am perfectly fine with Joseph Smith attempting a translation, if that's what happened.

Of course, there is no evidence to support either case, save for William Clayton's journal entry.

So what do we know? Only that William Clayton wrote those words in his journal and attributed them to "President J."
What is my Opinion? It doesn't matter to me if Joseph Smith attempted a translation or not, I am fine either way.

Paul,

All of your questions and my questions were and are answered on this awesome pro-LDS website.