Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by vampyregirl, May 23, 2012.
umm we are talking about evidence for the Q document here. I think you're confused.
Nope I'm not. I'm just wondering why you would question the validity of those documents from a "quasi Christian sect" considering your own religion is loaded with questionable documents of its own. Yet for some reason you question those which actually have some historical basis yet fully believe in ones that are at best dubious and at worst outright forgeries.
It's incredibly ironic.
The Gnostics were clearly a humanistic sect. Naturally im suspicous of such people. Another thing, the sect no longer exist. And, as i already said, i can't imagine the Jesus of the Bible saying those things attributed to him in the Gospel of Thomas.
Get it now?
But you are not suspicious of a convicted fraud with the worst "origin" story for his dogma in history?
That is the question Kuma is asking
hey man. it's not his fault the government was trying to get him!
the man decided to change his life after finding a book in the ground
Nope - convicted AFTER thhis so called "first vision"
The man was a criminal and a liar - end of story
No. I acknowledge there are no conclusive direct first hand accounts of what went on. And simply put the majority of scholars it seems agree that we don't really know who wrote the gospels. Perhaps you know something they don't? Please do share.
Hopkins was a Jesuit and had some ideas about Christ showing in the human, the divine in the mundane
As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies dráw fláme;
As tumbled over rim in roundy wells
Stones ring; like each tucked string tells, each hung bell’s
Bow swung finds tongue to fling out broad its name;
Each mortal thing does one thing and the same:
Deals out that being indoors each one dwells;
Selves—goes itself; myself it speaks and spells,
Crying Whát I do is me: for that I came.
Í say móre: the just man justices;
Kéeps gráce: thát keeps all his goings graces;
Acts in God’s eye what in God’s eye he is—
Chríst—for Christ plays in ten thousand places,
Lovely in limbs, and lovely in eyes not his
To the Father through the features of men’s faces.
You're hypocritical and you wear blinders. Talking with you is like talking with VampyreGirl. What you are ignoring are the assumptions that the "scholars" begin with. I see their assumptions, and I call foul. You ignore their assumptions and trot their conclusions as gospel truth.
Choosing to side with the majority of scholars is hypocritical? Well fine. Prove me wrong. Who wrote the gospels? Frankly I think you're blinded by your own faith and arrogance.
Actually he was accused in 1826 but never convicted of anything. DO your research. Read the court documents sometime.
His conviction is disputed...by Mormons...he was not convicted of anythinge else because he is a liar and a coward who skipped on the charges
Here is an explanation; The man was a crook and the so called "witnesses" were in on the scam - it is the least credible origin story ever
Or you can believe the story
I know which one actually makes sense, especially as pretty much everything he claimed has no basis in reality
Hmmm. According to my own research he WAS convicted of being engaged in flim-flamming others.
In late 1825 a wealthy Pennsylvania farmer named Josiah Stowell (sometimes spelled Stoal) came 150 miles to hire Smith because of Smith's reputation. Smith was hired to help Stowell locate a supposed old Spanish silver mine on Stowell's farm. During this time two significant things happened. First, Smith met his future wife, Emma Hale, and in later interviews her father explained how he didn't like Joseph Smith when he first met him because Smith was a money-digger, and Mr. Hale didn't want any criminals marrying his daughter! Perhaps even more damaging, however, was the fact that Smith was tried and convicted in court in March 1826 for "glass-looking". The charge had been brought up by Stowell's nephew, who saw through the con that his uncle didn't. Mormon historians now acknowledge that this trial happened and that Smith was convicted on this charge.
Moon Quakers. That's all I'm prepared to say on the subject.
Umm no they don't. Smith was accused of glass looking but not convicted. This is according to court documents.
Like I said - disputed by Mormons, not by anyone else. The phrase "overt agenda_ springs to mind
What is your take on him fleeing charges then? Making him a fugitive AND a criminal
I haven't been in this thread for a while but from reading this page is it now being said that J. Smith wrote the Gospel Of Thomas?
You're claim that he fled charges is absurd being that he married Emma in that very town 10 months later. But m1k is right, this is getting off topic.
Separate names with a comma.