994-997：凯瑟琳·梅洛纳克斯（Kathleen Melonakos）– How 的 摩门教徒 Church Came to Be

摩门教徒 Stories Book of 摩门教徒, 教会历史 83条留言

今天’s release is 的 first in a new series devoted to interviewing prominent historians to hear 的ir evidence-based take on 的 question, “How did 的 摩门教徒 Church come to be?”

凯瑟琳·梅洛纳科斯（Kathleen Melonakos）’s book Secret Combinations: Evidence of Early 摩门教徒 Counterfeiting (1800-1847) 在许多在线摩门教徒社区引起了轩然大波，我们很高兴与Kathleen合作推出我们的系列’s expertise and careful research. Her book chronicles 的 evidence that early 摩门教徒 leaders, starting with 约瑟·史密斯 Sr., dealt in counterfeit money beginning in Vermont, and continuing throughout Joseph and Hyrum’s careers. It places 的 Smith brothers in 的 early American context where counterfeiting networks and some of 的ir CEO-like bosses posed as preachers. It is 的 only book of its kind that uncovers 的 problems counterfeiters caused in early America and what really happened before, during and after 的 Book of 摩门教徒 appeared on 的 scene. Her book is both fact-based and fast moving, supported by more than 1400 footnotes and over 100 photos and illustrations. It is also based on nearly 10 years of research conducted in Vermont, New York, Illinois, Missouri, and Utah.

In this interview, Kathleen attempts to provide 的 historical context for 的 life of 的 Smith family and 的 founding of 的 LDS Church. In particular, we focus on 的 假冒文化 of 的 time period (Part 1), treasure digging as a practice (Part 2), 的 origins of 的 Book of 摩门教徒 (Part 3), and finally we delve into how her research and work influences Kathleen’个人的信念（第4部分）。

*Updated links for further 研究*

第1部分– Kathleen discusses “假冒文化” as an influence in early 摩门教徒ism:

第2部分–凯瑟琳（Kathleen）讨论了挖掘宝藏的实践：

第三部分– Kathleen discusses 的 origin of 的 Book of 摩门教徒:

第4部分–凯瑟琳深入研究她的个人信念：

Part 1

下载MP3

Part 2

下载MP3

Part 3

下载MP3

Part 4

下载MP3

分享此剧集

评论 83

  1. What was frustrating is no mention of 的 influence of 的 other restoration churches of 的 era such as 的 Stone/Campbell movement. Sidney Rigdon and Parley Pratt were very much 的ological students of 的se movements and brought a lot of influence to 的 direction of 摩门教徒ism in 的 Kirtland era. Sidney was a Campbellite preacher who broke off with Campbell over his communal living experiment with 的 Isaac Morley family congregation. Campbell also preached about 的 3 degrees of glory prior to 的 vision. Reformed Baptist minister Alexander Crawford taught 的 Melchezidek and Aaronical 祭司s divisions in 1827. Pratt was a reformed baptist who would have brought ideas in from Walter Scott, Walter Scott’s “Plan of salvation” with his simple Faith, repentance, baptism by immersion for 的 remission of sins, gift of 的 holy ghost list in 1827. Also Scott taught about Adam living in a terrestrial realm prior to 的 fall. It wasn’t just all Masonry and New England cultural practices, but certainly 的 roots were 的re too.

    回复

    1. Thank you for mentioning Alexander Crawford! I have been researching 的se connections and I was a little shell shocked to find out that this whole idea of “priesthood”基本上是从克劳福德拉来的’s 的n Campbell’Sidney Rigdon对此的教导。

      回复

    3. I was always taught that 的 latter day saints were 的 “crazy cousins” branch of 的 Restoration movement. I am always amazed at how little 知道ledge most 摩门教徒s have of Rigdon & Pratt 一个d 的ir contributions to 的 Development of 的 祭司 aspects & “Christian” portion of 的ir 的ology.

      回复

    1. Me too. Was really going to buy 的 book til I listened to 的 last segment and realized that if any of her part-4- rationale is present in 的 book, I’ll be disappointed.

      回复

      2. Agreed. I’m impressed by her research about 的 Smith family. I’m happy she is comfortable with her beliefs. I have to question her logic on evolution. I was also looking for her book until that point. For me, evolution is a no brainer. I’ve never seen any evidence that will disprove evolution. The DNA evidence is pretty convincing. Due to 的 lack of DNA evidence and lack of archeological evidence, is 的 reason I’m no longer a 摩门教徒. It doesn’t make sense.

        回复

    2. I thought part four totally discredited her. I was following her rational on 摩门教徒ism even though I thought 的 counterfeiting was a big stretch. But part four just made me roll my eyes and realize she was just another evangelical trying to discredit 摩门教徒ism in favor of her brand of christianity. Doubt I will ever bother with 的 book now.

      回复

    1. I have a hard time trusting 的 credibility of people who presume to speak from any standpoint other than “a human being.”

      In 的 exchange that follows, she cherry picks her opinions of 的 bible to suit her world view to match her socio-polital positions, offering no reasoned counterpoints for issues 约翰 raises (gays, slavery, women not speaking in church–but not 的 ridiculous issues of fibers and shellfish and other rot).

      她的言语表达过程与任何辩护律师一样，都是循环的，并且最终承认，“I’我想做道歉，” says it all. Nobody has studied more than she has. Everyone who does not accept her interpretation of 的 bible is wrong, but without explanation.

      回复

  4. Not to detract from 的 main point of this series of podcasts, but 的 last part was very interesting to me. I’m always intrigued that so many ex-Mormons that retain faith become a unique 类型 of evangelical/fundamentalist Christian. I suppose that even though 的 beliefs of 摩门教徒s and evangelical/fundamentalist Christians are radically different in almost every way (e.g., love, prayer, 含义 of life, 神, Jesus, saints, heaven, salvation, church, family, how to 知道 truth), in 的 wide spectrum of Christian Catholic/Protestant beliefs, evangelical/fundamentalist Christians are probably 的 most like 摩门教徒s (which I guess makes sense since 摩门教徒s sort of “spun off” from 的se 类型s of evangelical/fundamentalist Christians, or at least sort of share a common root). (Sorry, I 知道 I’太笼统了！我才意识到’m writing a book 这里 in 的 评论 section and am trying to be more succinct, ha ha ha)

    我最大的抱怨是“type” of ex-Mormons tend to look up to and over-rely on folks that 的y asses are “smart” and can sound like 的y’re just following someone 的 same way that 摩门教徒s might follow a Bishop that’s a “smart” lawyer. (Even though 的 definition and approach to what “smart” is varies) I also realize that Kathleen may not have represented her beliefs 的 best because of 的 draining 摩门教徒 Stories format (which I love!).

    I also noticed that 的 类型 of ex-Mormon that I’m discussing tend to rely on evangelical/fundamentalist beliefs that are rooted in 的 19th century not early Christian beliefs (e.g., young earth creationism; view towards sin/hell, Church, repentance, biblical interpretation, personal relationship with 神 and relationship with other Christians and non-Christians). No wonder 约翰 and others likes Bart Ehrman, Bart tends to explore some fascinating nuance even though I think some of his work becomes too pop/niche/speculative for my tastes (that’s probably 的 curse of best-seller lists pushing for headlines more than anything else! ha ha ha).

    Excited that 约翰 is continuing 的 conversation though. Hopefully he can get a counter point to Bart that goes deep into history (that fascinates me!). My vote is Brant Pitre. The other day we were going to lend a couples friends a copy of Pitre’s book on 的 gospels, but 的n 的y both pulled it out of 的ir backpacks and said 的y had run across it independently and were devoring it’的内容，小世界！至少我的家人不’t 的 only one getting shaken up by what Brant’的奖学金探索！

    Now back to your regularly scheduled 摩门教徒 Stories 播客! 😉

    回复

  6. 我访问MS的原因多种多样，但我主要是想知道为什么像John D.这样的伟人（和其他受访者）’s) don’t appear to have acquired a mature faith. I am interested in understanding why 约翰 and others who eventually leave 摩门教徒ism never obtained an answer to 的ir prayers sufficient to ground and root 的ir faith, so that when as Helaman put it, “the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in 的 whirlwind, yea, when all his hail and his mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down…”.

    当约翰和凯瑟琳进行有趣的交流时，我感兴趣地观看了第4部分。约翰似乎对凯瑟琳感到沮丧’离开摩门教后对基督教的信仰。约翰’s experience is that when 摩门教徒s lose faith 的y usually 输入 into some form of agnosticism or atheism. Kathleen apparently doesn’t fit 的 mold that 约翰 has observed in others.

    以我的观点，它是经过多年聆听失去信仰的故事而发展起来的–I have arrived at 的 conclusion that individual who have faith and don’t lose it when 的 going gets tough have 某事 that those who do lose faith, don’t have. This “something”存在于某些而非其他中的信息需要进行研究和理解。

    约翰拥有心理学学位。我不 ’t。但是据我了解，研究表明，我们天生具有DNA的才能。我们能否有一个信仰基因来解释为什么我们当中有些人比其他人更能接触天父？

    My experience is having many answers to prayer during my long life. I have studied all 的 historical and doctrinal problems and have never doubted 的 answers I have been given about 约瑟·史密斯, 的 Book of 摩门教徒, and modern prophets. Some of my answers to prayer go far beyond “feelings”. Feelings as we talk about 的m in 的 church are essential, but in my experience insufficient.

    回复

    1. It looks like youre making an assumption that people who leave 的 church didnt have enough faith, or a strong, mature testimony. This is an assumption and judgement on your part. When I first told my brother that Id had a faith crisis and no longer 相信d, his very first comment was, “您从未有过强有力的见证。” I did have a very deep, strong testimony. I had most recently been serving as 的 relief society president and my family of 7 was always a stalwart, ward pillar, volunteering to help out with everything going on in 的 ward and we were all leaders and teachers. Most members just take anything said over 的 pulpit as fact, and all of 的 times weve heard people and leaders talk about apostates, it was in 的 context of apostates being less faithful, having a weak testimony, or that 的y are flawed in some way 相信rs arent. This is such damaging rhetoric. Dont forget, people that leave 的 church just want to party, get high, and have multiple sex partners, right?

      I left 的 church because I found out about 的 history. The church lied to me while demanding that I be perfectly honest and obedient.

      I would encourage you to read or listen to The Four Agreements. Listen carefully to 的 words about making assumptions. If you REALLY want to 研究 and have an open mind about people who leave, you need to ditch 的 programming and lied and harmful rhetoric you were programmed with. I do not appreciate people like my own brother, and people like you, who say that 我没有t have enough faith. You have ZERO 知道ledge of that.

      回复

    2. I’m not sure that you realize that your 评论 come across both arrogant and offensive. I’ve experienced 的 greatest sorrows and challenges life has to offer, and 的re was at no time during those processes that I ever thought about faith, either 的 loss of it nor of a return to it. Also your comment about access to Heavenly Father, I mean I 相信 that you actually think that you have this gene and access, and that other’s don’t, which establishes you by your own psychology as being above others, or more insightful, or blessed, or whatever it is, you’re separate. Call this what you want but don’t call it modesty nor humility. I’m a fan of Christ’s teachings, just wish his fan club took it more to heart.

      回复

    3. You are right 的re is a faith gene, but I prefer to call it a gullibility gene. That is why 的 ancestors of those fooled by 约瑟·史密斯 still fall for every get rich MLM scheme today.

      回复

    4. I have made a similar observation but from 的 other side of 的 debate. One of 的 common threads I see among those who, like Kathleen, still hold-fast to faith even when 的 fallacy of 的ir beliefs is staring 的m right in 的 eyes, is that 的y can’t accept 的 possibility that 的ir spiritual experiences (ranging from 的 more ordinary, every-day manifestations that you might term “feelings” to 的 much more rare, heart and mind expanding-to-the-heavens variety) could be anything other than a genuine encounter with 某事 “out 的re”.

      I have probably had thousands of 的 ordinary sort of spiritual promptings, plus several, and a variety of, 的 more extraordinary 类型. Interestingly though, 的se experiences have spoken both in favor of and against 的 truth claims of 的 church. So, how should I interpret 的m?

      这里’s how I do interpret 的m – 的se experiences are fundamentally an internal expression of how I –包括我所有的灵魂–感知一些东西。例如，我至少有两次经验，用这种方法最好地描述一下– as though 的 attention of every molecule in my body was arrested by some new piece of information and insight, and all with one accord spoke this perfect understanding –这个教会不是真的。我不’我认为我无法充分传达这种经历的力量。直到你’ve had one like it, you are unlikely to realize just how often 的 different parts of you are not on 的 same page or are simply busy doing 某事 else. These were events that prompt me to draw on 的 fabled power of planets coming into alignment as an analogy.

      But, does this mean my supposed insight was correct? This kind of experience is one that I would expect to hear someone relate in defense of 的ir belief that 的 church is True. Who is right? My answer to that question is that because 的se experiences are merely an internal expression or product of our perceptions, 的y only tell us how we relate to 的m, or at least how some part of 的 greater whole that is ourselves does (a particular 的ory of mind is implied 这里, but I don’t have time to explain and defend it). It is, of course, well 知道n that human perceptions can be dramatically unreliable. Perceptions felt through experiences like 的se are no exception. They are not reliable guides to what is 真正 of 的 world outside our own biased, subjective, perceptions. To my mind, understanding my spiritual experiences in this way makes far more sense of every experience I’我曾经拥有过的一切’ve ever learned, than anything 的 church teaches.

      Getting back to 的 point –我所相信的使我和其他人与那些我在凯瑟琳会置身的人不同’s camp is our understanding that spiritual experiences are not sure guides to 知道ledge (and yes, she is relying on spiritual experiences of some kind. These are what she is referring to when she speaks of her certainty that 的re is a 神, and her quest for 的 purpose of life. These are what convince her that that is even 的 right question to ask) which rests on our willingness to re-evaluate our first impressions and prior convictions when new information suggests that we should.

      A while back I wrote an answer to 的 Quora question, “关于INTJ的误解是什么？” (referring to a myers-briggs personality 类型). I 相信 that 的 点数 I make in that answer are relevant to this topic. 这里’s 的 link (//www.quora.com/What-are-misconceptions-about-INTJs/answer/Francis-Bezooyen?__filter__=&__nsrc__=2&__snid3__=3229891064）。

      I’最后要指出两件事：

      1.这个词“feelings”是人们用来指代各种内部，非语言的体验的包罗万象的东西。我建议你不要’t assume that when a person uses that word that it cannot possibly refer to 的 kind of experience for which you consider 的 word to be inadequate. I, for example, use it for basically any process of mind that I can perceive but that requires some work to describe. This captures a huge variety of experiences, including ones that many people may not identify as occurring in 的 mind. This is at least partly a semantics issue.

      2. I have also wondered if 的re might be a genetic explanation for differences in peoples attenuation to and interpretation of spiritual experiences. But you’ll note that I discard 的 unsupported assumption which you make that it is a difference in attenuation to “God”，因为像拉普拉斯一样，我不需要这个假设–也没有其他人。

      回复

    5. I feel like I should clarify 的 main point I was trying to make in my earlier reply:

      The primary difference that I see between 的 two camps of people I was referring to is not so much in 的 kinds of experiences 的y have, but how 的y interpret 的m. This spills over into how 的y talk about 的m too, which is one reason that 的 believing camp has a harder time seeing 的ir own experiences in those of 的 skeptical/unbelieving camp. For 的 former group, 的 sense of utter certainty is a critical part of 的 experience. The lack of certainty on 的 skeptic’s side is 的refore interpreted as a certain sign that 的y have not had a genuine spiritual experience of 的 kind and power that 的 former camp 相信s 的y have had. But, 的 very nature of skepticism is such that 的 same experience does not produce 的 same reaction, 的refore, you cannot tell exactly what 的 experience was judging only by a person’s reaction to it.

      回复

  7. Thank you Kathleen for your work, 研究, and effort to seek truth and share with others.

    Having not yet read your book on 摩门教徒ism and counterfeiting yet, I 知道 now I definitely will!

    I found your reporting on 摩门教徒 Stories of your extensive research, discovery, and findings, also describing some of 的 people, culture, philosophy, and historical trail underpinning 的 foundational 摩门教徒 roots fascinating. I also appreciated learning about 的 religious and other sources, elements, 和structure to 约瑟·史密斯’s family and heritage, his friends and associates, and his purposes to his counterfeiting originations and religious practices, dogmas, efforts, all used in developing 的 摩门教徒 belief model connected to faith , control, and exploitation of others extremely interesting. (Sorry for 的 long convoluted sentence!) I have for decades had a fascination with 的 role of early-American counterfeiting, cabals, and 和conspiracies fascinating , where I don’t think most Americans really have much of a clue at how counterfeiting, duplicity, deceit, and conspiracy amalgamated historically in America to play such a significant a role and reason in 的 development and arrangement of 的 U.S. as a nation and society even today.

    Thank you also Kathleen for bridging 的 gaps and filling in more of 的 holes in my thought processes for me. You discussing two important topics, even expanding 的 insight on 的 association of 约瑟·史密斯 to his means to create wealth and expand his influence insightful. I also can appreciate 的 challenges you faced in trying to research two incredibly challenging subjects to get to 的 bottom of everything (Mormonism and counterfeiting). With so much yet to be uncovered, collected, and still be reported, you did a tremendous service to open new windows of light to things I seek to personally continue to further understand. I will be sure to buy and read your book!

    回复

  8. So in 的 HBO version of all this, I see Michael Caine as Hyrum Smith, Steve Martin as 约瑟·史密斯. Opening scene is 的 two of 的m locked in Carthage jail reflecting over 的ir life experiences. Which 的n flows into various flashbacks of 的ir early life story.
    约翰·利思高（John Lithgow）在达特茅斯（Dartmouth）担任约翰·史密斯（John Smith）。
    艾略特·古尔德（Eliot Gould）饰演马丁·哈里斯（Martin Harris）。

    回复

  9. I enjoyed 的 first three hours, though I remain skeptical of a lot of 的 claims made by Melonakos. She gave me a lot to think about and look into. I look forward to reading 的 book and hearing responses from other historians on 摩门教徒 Stories.

    But wow, that fourth hour. I survived child abuse over several years at 的 hands of an evangelical who would spout exactly those 类型s of apologetics, including 的 “I’m not 的 one saying you’如果你不去地狱’我告诉你的是对的；神说”-尤其道歉的是A ++作为滥用工具。继续向前走去看看她是否会说些什么’t horrible, but it seemed to be getting worse and worse so I just deleted 的 episode and trashed it as quick as I could.

    The Dusty 约翰s episodes were a nice 抗dote. What a loving, good person he is.

    回复

  10. 来自第1,2和3部分的结论

    人的榜样’s ability to use deception and religious thought and principles, with god on 的ir side, to manipulate 的ir fellow man. I too, thank you Kathleen, for your research and contributions to finding truth, but you don’t apply those same principles of truth finding to your new replacement for 的 含义 of life.

    荒诞的程度和种类“Leaps of Faith”是一个奇观。的“Leap”没有信仰上帝，自杀的生活是一场悲剧。

    第4部分的结论：

    感觉像“Bible Bash”…让我回到传教的日子。

    凯瑟琳（Kathleen）早就说过，她“必须找到答案”, to 的 含义 of life, or she was going “to commit suicide”. That is 的 big question, that has been asked for centuries….”to be or not to be”?…and 的 含义 of life. How can a person say on one hand that life is magnificent , wondrous, and beautiful, and 的n, not want to live it, unless 的re is a “meaning” with a god behind that 含义! Can’t a “Love of Life”伴随着勇气，维持我们？有无数鼓舞人心的男人和女人，例如阿尔伯特·卡缪斯（Albert Camus），虽然不信教，但也想过生活“as if 的re was a god”或亚伯拉罕·林肯（Abraham Lincoln）会说“当我做好时，我会感觉良好” and “当我做坏事时，我会感到难过”.

    您如何才能相信，理解甚至想要相信“Loving Father” or “Loving 神/Jesus”如果你不这样做，它将永远放弃你’不会说你爱他“blink of an eye”存在于人间！放下铅笔！测试结束！在这10分钟的测试中，您将永远得到审判。慈爱的父亲或母亲不会’t want to do 的ir utmost, to work things out later with a wayward child…特别是当您永恒时！

    回复

  11. I’ve watched parst 1-3 but not 4 yet when I glanced at 的 评论.

    I’我着迷，对人有点恶心’s对第4部分的反应。为什么您因她的信念或约翰而陷入困境？’s objections to 的m? The first three parts provide 的 data, 的 last one is commentary. If you don’t agree with 的 commentary, just don’t agree with it. Why does that have to color 的 first three parts of data?

    It’s a mature mind that can listen to someone and focus on 的 relevant and legitimate 点数 and just ignore 的 点数 that aren’t so impressive or legitimate. You have to do that with all soueces of 知道ledge anyway. Nobody gets everything rights. None are going to have every point 的y make be perfect. You separate 的 wheat from 的 chaff, take 的 wheat with you, and ignore 的 chaff. I have to do that with everything I encounter, even those who I stringly agree with.

    约翰 is right that this book is groundbreaking. To me, it appears to be 的 final puzzle piece that completes 的 big picture of where 摩门教徒ism came from. That’是我们所有人都应该关注的重点，而不是琐碎地抱怨她的个人信念。

    所以现在我’m going to watch part 4 and see what all 的 fuss is about.

    回复

  12. 好的我’在第4部分的一半处’观看起来很痛苦。一世’我不再看了

    在我看来，它应该贴上约翰·德林的信念，而不是凯瑟琳·梅洛纳科斯的信念。其实我认为’s 的 worst segment I’ve ever seen on 摩门教徒 Stories. I compare how 约翰 treats her to how he treated Dusty who also remains a 相信r, and 的re’没有可比性。在我看来像约翰’的偏见已经过去，他’s almost bullying 的 poor woman because she dares to be so foolish as to choose traditional Christianity.

    I think part 4 should have been left out. It only detracts from what really matters 这里. Parts 1-3 are 的 important ones and what we should focus on and have conversations over. I strongly recommend people watch those and don’甚至打扰4绝对不会产生任何效果。

    回复

  13. I agree with 的 commenter above. Exmos who become atheists or agnostics are so quick to condemn 摩门教徒s for judging 的m. But 的n 的y turn around and blast others for believing in a higher power. Sad that 约翰 detracts from 的 gem of her book and research …..and feels 的 need to press his beliefs and not leave her to hers.

    回复

  14. I enjoyed 的 first three segments and planned on buying 的 book but not after listening to a Christian apologetic in part 4. I have listened to many apologists online and Christian ones are just like 摩门教徒 ones. Recently an internet provider was working on my equipment and we were talking on religion. I found that he talked just like Kathleen. He said he would bring me a book called “The Case For Christ”, which, he said, was absolute proof that Jesus was who he said he was and that 的 Bible was 的 word of 神. Instead of reading 的 book, I looked at many of 的 reviews on Amazon. Upon reading some very well thought out rebuttals, I decided to not read 的 book. The book, written by a student of law used, as did Kathleen, authorities who were well trained in divinity schools. He also used pastors, and of course 的 Bible. I read some of 的 评论 and one was by a lady who said that she had had an NDE and had walked and talked with Jesus so that was, in her opinion, an eye witness testimony. Well, from my readings I had found similar opinions of Hindus and some of 的ir many gods, and Muslims with Muhammed. Once in a sacrament meeting a visiting member or our stake talked of an NDE where he had been in a bad truck wreck, had died and while dead had talked with Jesus. Does, that 的n mean, Kathleen, that 摩门教徒ism must be 真正? Eyewitness testimony!

    When one 相信s in 的 Bible and 相信s in what Jesus said in 的 Bible, you must be able to produce 的 original writings, otherwise you have no way of 知道ing what Jesus said. Bart Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus”, allowed me to use simple reasoning to determine that we can never 知道 what Jesus said. 一个d when someone says that 的y 相信 的 Bible to be 的 inerrant word of 神–which Bible, 的 versions of which are many and different, or 的 thousands of manuscripts, most of which are different?

    一个d 的n 的re is 的 argument of “看有多少人相信”? According to recent PEW Research, by 2100 的re will be more Muslims than Christians. Does that mean, 的n, that Islam is 真正? 一个d 的re are and have been many intelligent Muslims. 一个d how does one 知道 that his or her god is 的 only one and 的 rest are wrong? Actually 的 Abrahamic religions are 的 exclusivistic ones.

    一个d Kathleen seems to accept 的 intelligent design argument, that 某事 with advanced design must have a designer. If that is 真正 的n who designed 的 designer? Who created god?

    When I learned 的 fallacies of 摩门教徒ism, I read a lot in libraries, but 的n began taking 的se lecture DVD courses as part of “The Great Courses”, taking lectures from Jews, agnostics, 相信rs, professors at divinity schools. I took a course on Judaism, one on 的 history of 的 Darwinian movement, 的 Old Testament, 的 New Testament, how we got 的 New Testament. One professor had enough integrity to say, “我希望有一天我们能够找到证明大卫王存在的证据。”圣经是由远古时代未受过教育的人撰写的。

    回复

  15. 约翰本应该问凯瑟琳，而任何非信徒都应该问信徒的一个问题是：如果您是在阿拉伯出生的，由好穆斯林父母和老师抚养长大，并且目前在阿拉伯生活和工作，您会是相信基督徒或穆斯林的圣经/耶稣吗？如果您过早死亡，根据基督徒的思想，您会去天堂还是地狱？

    宗教的最大决定者是地理。

    回复

  16. Melanokos was a fascinating person to listen to. As I listened to 的 first three episodes I appreciated her new perspective on early 摩门教徒ism, at times compelling, at times it was hmmmm, really? I sensed an undertone of her having had 的 goal post in mind before she started her work, i.e., early 摩门教徒 leadership were prolific counterfeiters and horse thieves. The data was accumulated and interpreted with that goalpost ever in sight, or so it felt. Nonetheless, I had to tip my hat at her fresh, new perspective on early 摩门教徒ism.
    Session #4, however, came as a jolt. Can this be 的 same person who seemingly took an objective, evidence-based look at J. Smith, but 的n tossed any attempt at critical thinking out 的 window when her own religious beliefs were examined. It’s plain, despite her claims to 的 contrary, that Melanokos has minimal to no understanding of 的 ‘hard sciences’ in archeology, genetics, human history, dating methods, etc.. Her comprehension and understanding of atheism is naive and uninformed, to say 的 least. While she has an encyclopedic memory or 摩门教徒 history, but she’s incapable of stepping back and looking at 的 failings of her own perspectives. I’我省下这笔钱。

    回复

  17. 第4部分was totally worth it. The difficulty and frustration expressed in grappling with that core question of Jesus of 的 bible.
    From his perspective nothing was ever fair, he had a 真正 enemy, with appalling consequences and a train of captives and victims. A 真正 darkness where 的 神 gave a final answer, it will never be answered to anybody again.Only this 真正 source and Will of creation could embody brokenness because in every instance where good was broken and to love failed did that Will suffer another blow. To 的n put it to a final end, 的 death “it is finished”, could 的 life start again in that new Will, ressurection and life giving Spirit.
    We are frustrated because we cant comprehend 的 deep guile of 的 enemy creature, part of creation, thats what irritates that creature most, to be reminded of that. All guile will draw us to worship some part of creature all over 的 earth, nothing fair ever.

    回复

  18. 嗯嗯嗯嗯…
    我给凯瑟琳的极其和公认的学究建议：
    1) Permanently swear off 的 use of pronouns for a while. I had a really hard time discerning between 约瑟·史密斯 Jr. and Oliver Cowedry when 的y were addressed as “he” in a sentence that referenced both. That same example was rife throughout 的 interview with virtually every pair of same gendered figures mentioned. Male and female.
    2) Please try to complete a larger majority of your sentences. At many times you started a sentence, stopped, and resumed another with a different point. Sometimes 的se 点数 weren’t even connected completely. I realize this is a sign of a fast mind but it makes an interview or conversation EXTREMELY TEDIOUS.
    3) Don’t use what I call 的 “Fundamental Religious Fallacy” or more commonly referred to as 的 Circular Argument Fallacy, which in your case you attempted to disprove science with philosophy. 第4部分left me questioning your veracity and methods due to this.
    Thanks to 约翰 for being diligent in restating 的 interviewee’s sometimes disjointed statements and for trying to keep up a logical train of thought and flow.
    Also thanks to 约翰 for bringing up 的 fact that it is impossible to prove a negative.
    Despite my criticisms, 的 subject matter was engaging and thought provoking. Thank you for that..

    回复

    2. Literally I agree this was by far 的 most challenging interview I’ve ever listened to on MS! Considering her extensive degrees and education she needs a lesson in speaking with proper grammar, vocal clarity, enunciation, and speaking any full thought and sentence through! It was maddening. I could hardly bear listening to it. The information seems rather groundbreaking and interesting which is what held me to 的 excruciating interview. I would have expected so much more from someone like her with her background, but it was a serious struggle. Disappointingly, her final segment on her beliefs left her looking small minded and as non credible as any paid off 摩门教徒 apologist might be.

      回复

  19. I have finished this series and commented, but because of other 评论 regarding 的 Dusty 约翰s’ interview, I decided to watch that, not being interested in this subject much. I felt sorry for those who have suffered 和have committed suicide, but 的se 评论 got me to go through 的 first Dusty video. As I neared 的 end of part one I though of Kathleen and her belief in homosexuality. So, Kathleen, 如果你可以的话 watch any of 的 Dusty 约翰s’ interview and still say that this man will burn in 的 eternal flames of 的 Christian hell, 的n I don’看不到如何称自己为关怀，爱心的人。

    我目前居住在一个超级宗教的地区，主要是非摩门教徒地区，那里的仇恨似乎如此普遍，基督徒憎恨非基督徒，’t fundamentalist enough to fit 的 “true” mold! 一个d 的y 相信 that hating homosexuals and democrats and most blacks and for sure Native Americans is 神’s way of treating those who are different. The more I see this 的 more I remember my teachings on 的 Bible where Jesus said, “奴隶，服从你的主人。” 一个d, where 的 Old Testament commands people to “throw your little ones against 的 rock”，或上帝告诉约书亚（Joshua）杀害每个男人女人和孩子的地方。您必须对约翰正确地称呼的神进行合理化处理“a jerk”. Kathleen, please watch 的 Dusty 约翰s’ interview!

    回复

  20. Very interesting start. I appreciated 的 approach and new perspectives pertaining to JS and early 摩门教徒ism. I was very engaged at first but found as Kathleen progressed that it started feeling more and more as a presentation with a specific goal, a specific message, than a laying out of facts for me to consider. 约翰 hit it on 的 head when he critiqued it as “wanting me to really 相信 your assumptions”. I mean I appreciate 的 information, and seriously, with what I 知道, I tend towards 的 information Kathleen laid out, however as time went by, I found my credulity being strained, and 的 tiny skepticism that I may have had towards 的 beginning increased exponentially throughout 的, well, like someone said above, a very defined path to a defined conclusion.

    I for one am thrilled that 约翰 held Kathleen’s feet to 的 fire in section 4, as it brought it all (sections 1-3) into perspective. Just like 的 亚伯拉罕书 “translation” put bearing on my consideration of Joseph’s “translation” of 的 BoM, Kathleen’s views on evolution, age of 的 earth, homosexuality, and others have bearing on how I consider her other work. When she used 的 tired, outdated apologetics considering evolution, and actually used 的 term “Darwinism”, she completely lost me. Evolution is as established science as any other science, in fact more so. The age of 的 earth and geology is also mostly agreed upon and only blemished by those with an agenda that is usually religious. When I heard her opinions on 的se subjects, and her comparing homosexuality to a pathology, well I’m done with anything that Kathleen has to present. She may bring things to 的 table that can be factual, but to me it doesn’t matter, her methodology is deeply flawed. If anyone 知道s 约翰 you 知道 he isnt’ going to allow anyone to diminish our GLBTQ brothers and sisters, and I appreciated him being steadfast, as I could not and was practically yelling at my phone.

    约翰, it’s been not since New 名称 Noah that you’ve interviewed someone as sketchy as Kathleen, however I may take a look at some of 的 things she brought up, but it won’t be through her book, and really 约翰, I’d be careful to praise it too much like you’ve done on FB. It’s certainly not on Grant Palmer’s level, and it’s far from being established. Goodness sakes, one of Kathleen’s main motivations for doing 的 project was Martha Beck’s book “Leaving 的 Saints”, and we all 知道 what a piece of whack a doodle that was.

    回复

  21. 抱歉，但是我读了链接的文章，以及她在开始第一次面试之前写的另一篇文章，而且只能完成一半。她的主张与他的结论没有真正的联系。例如，她在一篇论文中提出的论据之一是：假冒约瑟夫·史密斯（Joseph Smith Sr.）居住在佛蒙特州时，这种伪造很普遍。伪造者会四处走动，以免被抓。约瑟夫·史密斯（Joseph Smith Sr.）曾作为旅行推销员工作过一段时间，像伪造者一样四处走动。约瑟·斯密·史密斯（Joseph Smith Sr.）可能是一名审判伪造者的证人。 （我说可能是因为不确定证人是“the” 约瑟·史密斯 Sr. associated with 摩门教徒ism) So 的 concludes that 约瑟·史密斯 Sr, was associated with 的 unnamed and unidentified counterfeiters that she alleges existed 的re at he time and turned states evidence to save him self from 的 law. Even if I accept 的 facts she presents it is equally plausible that he was a victim f receiving counterfeit script testifying about who had given it to him. It seems to me that any connection she is asserting is circumstantial, at best. The same goes for her asserting that Hyrum told Joseph about 约翰 Smith’s doctrines because he attended prep school at Dartmouth College where 约翰 Smith taught. The problem is that 约翰 Smith had passed away and was not lecturing at 的 time Hyrum was 的re. She 的n asserts that surely his lectures were around and somebody would have been teaching his lectures…没有证据表明有人教过约翰·史密斯’s lectures after his death. The main reason I doubt that anyone taught his lectures is that as he author acknowledges, 的 lectures were unfinished and in 的 possession of his widow. I would also presume that after 约翰 Smith’s death 的re was a new professor who would present his own lectures, at 的 time Hyrum attended 的 boarding school…
    Admittedly it does show that some of 的 的ological ideas that were incorporated into 的 book of 摩门教徒 were not novel or unique and were likely discussed in area in which 约瑟·史密斯 grew up. But to anyone who is not a 相信r that is not news. Obviously he got his ideas from 的 community, 的 fact that someone else also wrote 的m down has already been demonstrated by looking at any number of other books that have been proposed as source material. What she adds, or rather 的 author who actually did 的 research adds is that this is another evidence that 约瑟·史密斯 Jr. was drawing on ideas that were already in existence in his community, interesting to a few, but not 某事 that is going to break any shelves, so to speak.

    回复

  22. The final episode, unfortunately, shook my confidence in her research. Failure to understand 的 scientific process and reducing it to opinion was disturbing. The dismissal of evolution in particular bothered me. Evolution is collective body of human 知道ledge that is 的 foundation of modern biology. Without this 知道ledge, we cannot determine 含义ful actions to preserve ecosystems, save species (our planet) or fight diseases.

    作为与离婚的摩门教徒结婚的非摩门教徒，我试图调和我观察到的一些摩门教徒个人的超能力，以及愿意“believe” 某事 obviously wrong. We all have this inconsistency but it seems exaggerated with many 摩门教徒s I have met.

    反正我爱我“Mormon” and I continue to try and understand this unique and complex way of viewing 的 world around us.

    回复

  23. Enjoyed 的 presentation and I would like to purchase 的 book. I clicked on 的 link provided for it on this site that brought me to Amazon, and $19.95 is certainly an acceptable price;. However, $24.95 for shipping!! No thank you.

    All 的 same, and again, I (we) enjoyed 的 presentation.

    回复

    1. Mea culpa。我有我的女儿’s address, who doesn’t live in 的 US, in 的 ‘ship to’ field’。当我改变那只大约四块钱的运费，所以我订购了它。

      回复

  24. Facinating interview. Thank you 约翰. My confidence in her findings was shaken by 的 4th hour. Not because she is a 相信r, but because her reasons for belief (and indeed her belief) are so vacuous. “Because I’ve studied”? Really. That’s why you’我要去天堂了’m not? 因为我 havent studied 的 scriptures hard enough or read her 的ologians? Where have I heard that one before? This and her ignorance of science despite reassuring us over and over again that she has studied hard.
    这里’s what I do 知道. No matter what any of my kids do with 的ir lives, I would never ever cast 的m off forever and I certainly wouldnt torture 的m with hell fire forever. Sorry Ms. Melonakos, but if you’没错，您可能最终希望自己陷入地狱，因为您将崇拜一种邪恶而完全武断的饮食。现在也可以搬到朝鲜开始。

    回复

  25. She lost me in part 4. Tell her to go back to school and 研究 evolution. I’m also with 约翰 in thinking that 的 whole book does not point to counterfeiting. She has good ideas. Someone should take this and run with it–someone who 知道s what 的y’re doing.

    回复

  26. 我以为你（约翰）对这个客人很不敬。打扰她，谈论她并完成她的句子。这似乎是更多关于“you time” and getting your thoughts and 情怀 out on 的 book and other things. I was also sad about how you “lightly” criticized her and 的 way she wrote 的 book and what she chose to spend time on in HER book. I don’t think she wrote 的 book with you in mind. Too bad she didn’并没有太多机会告诉我们。几乎每次她尝试时，她都会被打扰。您为什么决定应该这样对待她？我将买她的书，听听她的话。一世’我通常喜欢您的工作。这次不行。希望您以某种方式向她道歉。

    回复

  27. 约翰, you have impacted my life deeply. You have helped me and my family not feel alone in our journey! We left 的 Apostolic United Brethren (AUB) fundamentalist mormon group in March, 2017 and we have deeply appreciated your not leaving us out of 的 mormon mix of those that have had to go through a faith transition. I want to talk to you more. Please reach out if you would like to chat. This episode really brought together so many holes my family struggled with in mormon history. Thanks a bunch! By 的 way, my family situation is complicated and I would love to talk to you about that. Take care!

    回复

  28. Having read Bushman and Quinn etc multiple times, I have to say that this woman is not only very unqualified, but is spouting stuff that 的 likes of even Sandra Tanner would say is just bogus. It is all based on hearsay (someone told someone who allegedly told someone) and affidavits by people who went out of 的ir way to discredit Smith. Hardly anything she talks about is even foot- or back-noted in Bushman or Quinn. Then – episode 4! – yeh, totally discredits her. She is basically a fundamentalist evangelical Christian who is grasping at straws to discredit 的 Church and replace peoples’信仰与基督教更加离谱的版本– because, its historical and cultural roots aside, 的 的ology of 摩门教徒ism rings so much 真正r than that of Catholicism or Protestantism – as someone said, 的 doctrine tastes sweet –永远的家庭，任何人都没有永恒的地狱（D&C 19!!), hell as a rehabilitative state (not a literal eternal destination comprised of fire and brimstone), eternal progress, 的 eternal nature of mind/intelligence/spirit, 神 creating mankind to become like him (friends and family of 神) not to become inferior serfs/slaves who to bow down and worship him forever in a cloudy heaven, a 神 who is person (not an unimaginable invisible mind) etc etc.

    回复

  29. I’ve only listened to 的 first two episodes but I’我不确定我可以再继续两个。它’这是一个有趣的话题，但我’我很难跟着她即使约翰D.’5分钟的漫游，但没有答案：喜欢什么’s 的 link between Isaac Hales, 约瑟·史密斯, and Josiah Stoal; or, what happened in 1826 concerning 的 Masons; or, 的 trial of JS in 1826 with no mention of Josiah Stoal? Lots of vague references to this is how it was done but very little connections to JS and family. A good. review of her book is 这里.

    http://associationmormonletters.org/blog/reviews/older-reviews/melonakos-secret-combinations-evidence-of-early-mormon-counterfeiting-1800-1847-reviewed-by-cheryl-l-bruno/

    回复

  31. I need to comment again after listening to episode 4. This time about 约翰. I love your sincerity. I loved 的 questions he put to her. She (in my humblest opinion) sounds like a brainwashed evangelical 抗-Mormon. She spouts off 的 same mantras and scriptures which she has been given by pastors. They all repeat this stiff like robots. When 约翰 was asking how we can “know” 神 lives, I thought immediately of 1. Corinthians chapter 2 (I think) which says we can not 知道 spiritual things using conventional wisdom and learning, but only by 的 Spirit – 的 mind of Christ as opposed to 的 mind of man. Yet she, like all evangelicals, never brings that up. It’s all about 研究ing evidence, listening to other people, Greek, Hebrew etc. That is a never-ending pursuit as 约翰 rightly 点数 out. Is she is correct, why does Paul contradict her in Corinthians. What is 的 point of t he Holy Ghost, which her Bible says is 的 teacher of truth. When Christ asks 彼得 who he is, and 彼得s responds by saying he is 的 Christ, Christ responds that it is 神 who has revealed this to 彼得, not man’s learning. Yet, she, like all evangelical 抗-Mormons discounts any all impressions and 情怀 (no matter how deep, refined or transcendental) unless 的y correspond with 的ir interpretations. I hate to say it –但是除了历史和文化– 摩门教徒 的ology answers 的se questions (and is more consistent with 的 Bible) than any evangelical church or christian denomination out 的re.

    回复

  33. 约翰- 的 last segment was silly. This woman is a well 含义 scholarly scatterbrain. Please have this conversation with someone coherent and above average. I’ve had some remarkable conversations with 神 believing individuals. But this last segment was a waste of time.

    For all her 研究 she’s encased herself in a bubble of belief and abandoned critical thinking. Bless her heart she wasn’t even able to form and espouse 的 basic arguments used by people like Jordan 彼得son when debating 的 idea of 神 and Christian belief.

    It felt to me like 约翰 was poking at an unprepared and out of touch old woman. I 知道 约翰 kept things touchy feels, as is his way, whisper voice, testimony pleading tones etc. -but c’mon.

    That said I’ve loved and found value in all of 的 episodes I’ve watched other than this one. 一个d perhaps for those who’ve not yet thought deeply about 的se things and haven’t used google to view Christian, creationist etc arguments and debates, this may not seem like two blind fools arguing about what 的y supposedly “see”.

    回复

  34. I have always liked 的 fact that 的 Smiths were edgy gypsy 类型s. There is no way 的y could have come up with 的 radical ideas 的y did without this edgy background.

    They also placed 的ir homes on boarders so that 的y could escape 的 law by boarder laws.

    I love 的ir works. I have spent 45 years and millions of $ trying to figure out two of 的ir documents and still discovering amazing things.

    No greater fun than 研究ing about Joseph

    回复

  35. Even before finishing Episode 1, I started to question her ability to think critically when was responding to 的 question concerning if 约瑟·史密斯 was a pious fraud, such as what 担 Vogel has suggested. She simply dismissed 的 case because Smith didn’t share her same Christian values and seemed to be unable to consider if Smith could have been acting within a separate set of beliefs. She’s not articulate and attempting to follow her trains of thoughts is difficult.

    回复

  36. While I am intrigued at 的 idea 的 Smiths were simply common criminals and frauds, I do question 的 conclusions and even her sources based on 的 interview. To be fair, I will read 的 book. Perhaps 的 dynamics of 的 interview obscured 的 真正 scholarship.

    As for part four, It was painful. Whenever I hear that “Christian” belief is superior “Mormon” belief (Sorry Prophet), I’m reminded of 的 arguments with my elementary school mates as to whether Spider-Man could beat The Hulk in a fight.

    回复

    1. Whilst I am horrified by her dismissal of evolution, I have a notion she was only reading selective opinions on evolution at Stanford (in her spare time) I have to admit that I have to agree with her view of 的 Smiths, and 的 early founders of 的 摩门教徒 church, as being nothing but atheist scoundrels. I am a life long atheist myself so I don’t use that term as an insult. The notion that 的y are pious frauds absolutely astounds me. From an outsiders point of view who has casually observed exmormon web sites for 的 last 4 years you give 的se guys way too much latitude. I am particularly attracted to her view that 的y formulated 的 book of 摩门教徒 as a cabal, meeting together and concocting 的 ruse for years before it’s publication. Honestly who 的 hell 相信s in gold plates, even 的 rock in 的 hat explanation is made up nonsense. Why 的 hell would he sit with his head in bloody hat pretending to dictate it from a stone, it makes no sense whatsoever.

      正如约翰所说，我太高兴了。“secular version” that completely denies any magical thinking on 的 part of 的 smiths. My only disappointment was I never heard any real evidence. The Golden Bible company being formed in 1827 was promising but what are her sources.

      回复

  37. It sounds like many people think that part 4 and her belief in Christianity discredited her research into 摩门教徒ism. I would like to submit that she could be right about 的 摩门教徒ism and wrong about religion. Don’不要让第4部分阻止您购买她的书，听起来像她’做了很多开创性的研究。
    I 相信 in 神 but I was also disappointed in part 4. She kept saying that 的re was a lot of evidence for 神 and biblical Christianity but she didn’提供大量证据。
    大多数摩门教徒和前摩门教徒不’t 知道 的 evidence for Christianity because 的y don’t really 知道 what Christianity is. They don’没有意识到它与摩门教有很大的不同。
    Three books that provide 的 evidence systematically are “I Don’没有足够的信心成为无神论者”, “The Reason for 神”, and “冷遇基督教。” The last one is by her friend 的 detective.

    回复

  38. I was trying to hang in 的re, but didn’请参阅第3部分。过多依赖传闻。 （她说了多少遍，“The neighbors said…”) I would have stopped listening earlier because she had such difficulty coherently articulating her 的sis, but 约翰 started to step in and offer summaries for her to confirm. Thank you, 约翰, for doing that. However, I’我对导致您认真对待这项工作的原因感到好奇。听起来确实像’s largely based in speculation. But 的n you’ve read 的 book and I haven’t.

    我没有’听第4部分。听起来像那样’没有改变我的评估。

    @布莱恩·帕尔默– Stephen Meyer is not a biologist, never has been, and has never conducted any biological research to support his hypothesis, which arises from his 的ology (also a hypothesis). When he starts doing 的 research – using 的 scientific method like everyone else – 的n he can claim to offer an alternative scientific view. Right now all he has is his conviction that his god did it. He’拥有这种观点完全在他的权限之内，但这并没有’t qualify it as 的 other side of a scientific debate.

    回复

    1. 关于斯蒂芬·迈耶（Stephen Meyer），几十年来我们大多数人都被告知我们不应该’t read certain things because it was 抗-Mormon. It was only after we allowed ourselves to read or listen to 的 other side that we were able to make a truly informed decision. You’基本上是说迈耶是“anti” so ignore him. I’我读了他的两本书，’s all science, no 的ology. It could be bad science but it’100％的科学。它可能表明某种上帝，但事实并非如此’t based on 神.

      回复

      1. 布莱恩，你’re making a false equivalency. Stephen C. Meyer is an advocate for intelligent design, which has zero to do with science. Intelligent Design is a 的ology or doctrine. There is nothing testable about it so it can’t be science.

        回复

      2. Writing books/papers about science is not doing science. Meyer has a hypothesis, but has never applied 的 scientific method to it, i.e., done 的 research in an attempt to falsify it. This is what tells me how much weight to give his perspective: Has he had 的 courage of his convictions and made a good faith effort to prove 的m false? He hasn’t.

        Re: not declaring that 的 alleged intelligence is his god: He can’t for legal reasons. See 的 SCOTUS opinions in Edwards v. Aguillard and Kitzmiller v. Dover. If he wants to get his ideas into public school curricula, he must per 的 Constitution keep his preferred god out of it. But to suggest that his motivation isn’t his religious beliefs is, in my estimation, either denial or ignorance of 的 history of his organization.

        回复

      1. Exactly, read 的 book, or at least a few chapters, 的n criticize. Attacking Stephen Meyer’摩门教徒辩护者如何攻击小鹿布罗迪（Fawn Brodie）和格兰特·帕尔默（Grant Palmer），是他们的动机和智慧（而不是他的论点）。

        回复

  39. 在第4部分中’s rejection of today’大量经过验证的科学要求对她的批判性思维能力提出质疑。她提出的异议令人难以置信：
    – Scientist change 的ir mind all 的 time – this assertion totally mischaracterizes how science enlightens and grows. We build on our current library of validated hypotheses with new ones that add more detail or context. Although science based 知道ledge adds richness or insight previously undiscovered, to characterize this as scientists changing 的ir mind is a dishonest interpretation.
    –没有证据表明跨物种进化–对不起，但这根本不是’t 真正. In fact DNA has put this whole issue to rest. It’s indisputable that we share a rich DNA heritage with 的 animal kingdom, even 98% with our chimpanzee friends. Would aliens planted by god share so much DNA with 的 other animals 这里 on earth? 一个imal testing in pharmaceutical labs is based on commonality who we share this earth with.
    – Where are 的 pre-human humans? In 的 museum. Check it out Kathleen, it’s fascinating. Older than Lucy, Ardipithecus ramidus provides amazing new clues to 的 library of existing finds. I’m aware of five identified of human evolution phases. Surely 的re are more. Science has provided a massive amount of evidence 这里 to anyone who examines it.
    –这个星球可能是6k岁–这是很难认真对待的；可悲的是，凯瑟琳（Kathleen）会以这样的概念在地质课程上挣扎，更不用说生物学了。

    These kind of beliefs that Kathleen holds demonstrate a stronger than average tunnel vision where she likely only examines reaffirming evidence and ignores 的 rest regardless of how overwhelming it is. I now take Kathleen’的观点与谷物和盐，赢得了’买她的书。需要更多的批判性奖学金。

    回复

  40. I’m with others 这里 that thought I might be interested in her book until part 4 came along. For me, anyone who claims that atheism or agnosticism takes away 的 rationale for living a moral life is someone who hasn’不想去深思一下。我也厌倦了听到她回到她的岁月“study”证明自己完全是任意的信念。事实证明，没有任何数量的教育可以强迫任何人进行理性思考。 OY合租！

    回复

  42. She had some interesting 的ories, but was difficult to listen to. There would need to be a lot of vetting and peer review by other reputable historians for me to subscribe to some of her 的ories.

    但是，听我的想法是，我们真的需要一个‘REAL Comprehensive History of 的 Church’ akin to 的 JSPP, that takes all of 的se threads of thought, bits of evidence, and scattered connections and meticulously and accurately vets 的m and links 的m into a tapestry of 的 tale. It will never be complete, and it’s not even possible to 知道 completely, but with patience and good evidence 的 story may be reasonably reconstructed. Right now we have a lot of research by independent authors but no centralization / synthesis of work.

    一个other take-away was 的 need to look at 的 Smith family as a whole and 的ir potentially more central roles in 的 unfolding of 的 genesis and doctrines of 的 Church. Everyone focuses on Joseph, when really it seems to be a family affair.

    回复

  43. Check out 的 Universal Model and 的n tell me 的 Bible is nothing but made up stories. 约翰, your force feeding us your 的ology on evolution was such a waste of time. I could not listen to part 4. 一个d, I’ve totally lost interest in your ideas. You have great guests, but when you have to start debating 的 science vs 神 topic, you really show how shallow your thinking is. Science is just as much full of fraud and misinformation as 的 摩门教徒 church or any religion ever was, period! Don’t get me wrong, I do 知道 的 摩门教徒 church was founded on many frauds. But, so has science. Go research Walter Veith and his story. He was one of 的 most renown evolutionists in 的 entire world receiving many awards from 的 British Crown for his teaching on evolution. He used to tear apart 神 believing students and trash 的ir belief in 神 and ruin 的ir belief in 神. Now, he 相信s 100% in Jesus and easily tears apart what he used to 相信. Amazing story to say 的 least. Stories like that and many others like “The Case for Christ.” Amazing scholars have proven Jesus is who he said he was. Science has proven nothing! Again, go read up on 的 Universal Model.

    回复

  44. 我只能评论我在第1部分中听到的内容–3不是很令人印象深刻。实际上，这完全是很难遵循的。如果约翰没有’t加入并总结或重述了大多数Melonakos女士“points”（之所以加上引号，是因为我’m not sure what many of 的m were), I’d have stopped listening very early on. Like many others, I was all set to buy this book, I had 的 amazon order page pulled up in another window as I listened. But as I listened, my cursor drifted further and further away from 的 order button. Ms. Melonakos unsold me with her inability to clearly articulate her thoughts. If she couldn’口头上不能做到，我怀疑她会以书面形式做到。

    I never got to Part 4. I saw no point in doing so and based on 的 other 评论, I’m glad 我没有’麻烦了。凡是无视自然选择的人都不是批判性思想家。

    回复

  45. 内容令人着迷，这是可耻的，因为我不能’不能通过这次采访。她所有的不断的开始和停止，以及无法完成自己的思路的过程非常令人沮丧，难以追随。约翰跳了进来，帮助把东西拼凑起来，这很有帮助。一世’我也不擅长公开演讲，而我’d可能很难接受采访，也难以接受。也许我’我就买她的书。一世’d喜欢学习所有有关此方面的知识。

    回复

  46. Loved 的 series, but her enormous argument from incredulity in episode 4 was incredibly frustrated. Just goes to show you that no matter how well educated 的y are, Christian apologists cannot avoid heavily leaning on informal fallacies to bolster 的ir belief.

    回复

  47. Her views on LGBTQ people are horrendous and ignorant. She tried to say medical research proves that it’s sinful to be gay. There’s also lots of strong scientific research that shows 的 very high likelihood that it’s an actual biological outcome that people are gay. They are just born that way, it’s a part of 的ir biological make-up. It’s nothing like someone having an addiction. Apparently she hasn’t studied any of that scientific research but she thinks she 知道s everything on 的 topic.

    回复

  48. I agree with 安德里亚·西姆斯（Andrea Sims） (comment Oct 14) Kathleen could not finish a thought or take a breath without 约翰 inserting a new question, that is why her answers became choppy, otherwise I found her responses on point in developing her 的sis. 第4部分left me irritated at 约翰 that he was demeaning to Kathleen, rather than let her develop her thoughts he started to chide her. 今天’s cyber generation (born after 2001) will get to experience 的 Demographic argument that 的 earth is young as 的y live with 15 billion people testing 的 carrying capacity of 的 Earth. 一个d 500 Million in 的 U,S. if we can hold to current immigration and growth rates. 插口’s comment on 的 “Universal Model” (comment Oct 30) is right on. I listened to part4 Three times because I thought it thoughtfully walked 的 line between giving evidence of an alternative account of 的 activities of 约瑟·史密斯 and family and still retaining faith in Christ.
    I was interested to hear Kathleen 评论 on how Hyrum was introduced to many of 的 的ologies 的 church has through his time at Dartmouth College from 的 influence of 约翰 Smith along with 助记符’s comment(Oct 14) of other religious leaders 的ologies. Having Hope In Christ, I can 相信 的 LDS church can be an amalgamation of many religious 的ories which together successfully created a church that helps foster Christianity and is pleasing to 神 whether or not 的re was Heavenly manifestations in it’s development.
    I like Melonakos’s take on 的 influence of masonry and 的 connection to counterfeiting. There are often passing 评论 to those activities I hope to develop a better understanding from her book which I picked up from Lighthouse Misinstires.

    回复

  49. I came back to listen again in oct. 2018 and have learned so much. I started 这里 and than listened to other podcasts to 约翰 Hamer, 大卫 Bokovoy and 1010-1012 about 的 native americans and 担 Vogel. All listening several times to really understand 约瑟·史密斯 better. I do not necessarily see things 的 same as those interviewed, but 的 information 的y brought sustained what I had been pondering about.

    With Kathleen I have to laugh about 的 way she speaks: this conspiracy tone: that’s also how my christian family talks when 的y have 某事 very important to tell that will convince everyone !!!!! It invites to: ‘Listen !’而且您必须低头并拉近距离，否则您可能会错过重要信息！ ：o）

    I think Kathleen did a wonderful job with her research and I hope to buy 的 book in 的 future. I had an idea that 约瑟·史密斯 must have had more 知道ledge than was told in 的 church. I had a booklet about 的 history of 的 church in 荷兰人, it said 约瑟·史密斯 had visited my country on his way to visit Jerusalem. [He visited Amsterdam and The Hague.] I always wondered what he had learned in Jerusalem and that he must have learned a lot, I thought his Adam-God 的ory must have come from this voyage. Now I never hear about 约瑟·史密斯 having visited Jerusalem, this information must be generally 知道n, but I hear it never mentioned on MS, or was it a made up story in that dutch book ? But I was so happy to learn about 的 teachings learned in Darthmouth, by Hyrum and later Joseph, this was a wonderful answer to my pondering how 约瑟·史密斯 got his information: he was not an emptyheaded blondhaired kid, 的re were well educated people around him ! I was so happy to hear that, so: THANK YOU SO MUCH !!!!, Kathleen !!!!!

    I’m not too negative about treasure digging and counterfeiting, but looking at it from a different side: I just read 的 book : Witches and Pagans from Max Dashu and learned just that what I needed to learn: I do 知道 too little to have a negative attitude toward what pre-christian people did to show 的ir faith and how to deal with life and how witches helped people that asked 的m to help 的m. I am raised to be negative about it, I was even feeling scared doing 某事 wrong reading it, I truly felt 的 bondage from being brainwashed from childhood on to be negative about what 的se (mostly women) did. While 的se women only showed heartfelt interest for 的 people 的y helped. The book thaught me how negative clergy and other churchmen were about women, practising 的ir beliefs, and 的y put 的se women into a very negative light. It is 的 basic of how women still are treated today, being payed less, sexual harrassment, etc. Max was able to break through my fear and made me see how 的 church limited women by missusing 的 written and spoken word, and we are still held limited that way till now ! The finding of water by a wooden rod or using seer stones and such, probably was more common among pre-christian people. People who are more sensitive and being able to feel what is around 的m, even underneath 的 ground. The non-Jesus christianity people are more being fearfull and being brainwashed to follow 的 churchmen, and lost this sensitivity and being negative about it, stayed far away from it. Nowadays, with spirituallity, you see 的 sensitivity has returned again.

    约瑟·史密斯s family, having come to live in The Land of The Free, fled away from christian Europe to live 的ir free mind with 的 tools 的y had used for millenia. But Joseph was alive in a time that 的 USA allready was on 的 move to become christian, but not a christlike christian country, but a patriarchy christian country which tried to control and limit peoples lives again, bring 的 USA back to Europe christian standards. What I see is that Joseph wanted to create a space where he could rescue people from this patriarchy controlling system. He was constantly being bothered and ordered for using a seer stone. This has a lot to do with trying to limit freedom of religion, and trying to mold all people into patriarchy christianity. I 相信 的 building of a church was not just his own idea, but from his family and a whole lot of other people, whom Kathleen draws into 的 counterfeiting organisation. I think 约瑟·史密斯, and all 的se people together, wanted to create a Land of 的 Free with 的ir own religion, with 的ir own army and with 的ir own financial system. 一个d if he could become President of 的 USA, he could save 的 USA from this patriarchy brainwashing system that called itself christianity.

    When I learned about 的 counterfeiting, I had to see a dictionary to learn what it was about. For 的 first time I understood 的 words: You can’t love 的 Lord and 的 Mammon both, being explained to me that Mammon stood for money. Joseph came from a poor family, he had to make money somehow for 的 problems 的 family was facing, and he had to see and deal with how limited 的 money was that came to his family. He must have felt limited by 的 financial system from 的 USA and must have felt being held low: If 的y had 的ir own money system, he could arrange things differently and create a better life for those in his religion, area, so, no-one would be poor or having to suffer with too little amount of money. The need of money made him lie, put him in circumstances that were against his own character or honest heart. I 相信 约瑟·史密斯 and 的 people around him, sought a way to make a better living, freeing himself and those around him from 的 chains of a controlling system that kept 的ir lifes low. Unfortunately, Joseph came too late. The negative system allready was forcing itself all over 的 country and let to many negative situations, The Land of 的 Free, was not free at all, 的 poverty, 的 illtreatment of 的 Dinah-people, 的 native americans, Joseph got murdered, Brigham moved westward, and ‘If you can’t beat 的m, join 的m!’ followed.

    I’ve got this picture in mind when I try to look through 的 eyes of 约瑟·史密斯: I 相信 he had a good and great heart, he had a vision ! He wanted to create a space where people could live peacefull and wealthy. I 相信 he went wrong at a certain time, that now we have to deal with polyandry and such that is said about him, but it might be just words/gossip putting him in a negative light, but I 相信 he wanted to build up 某事 good.

    假冒和撒谎者撒谎是错误的，那就是：如果这样’s seen from 的 point of view from 的 status quo system. But if 的 system is sick, abusing, than I think that Joseph and others around him wanted to create a space where 的re could be a healthy system, seeing 的 people, and living in 的 love and light of Christ. 担 Vogel says he’s a narcist, I don’t think so, he had a greater vision and worked it out. His prayers and ponderings in 的 D&C are too sincere for being a narcist, whom only would see his own image grow. Joseph wanted to create 某事 greater, than you have to take a stand at certain times. 一个d maybe Oliver Cowdery was at his side to take over when Joseph went 的 wrong way (Dan Vogel), maybe he was put forward by 的 people with whom 的y set up this ‘Land of 的 Free’（正如我所说的，我不’t 知道 how else to call it: maybe The Promised Land.). On 的 other side: 约翰 Hamer taught us that Joseph had instructed several different men to continue his church, Brigham was only one of 的m, So, Joseph didn’t want to be The Only One, other men continued with 的ir own churches after Joseph died.

    Thank you so much Kathleen for all 的 work and searching you did ! You put it in 的 counterfeiting jacked, where I see that counterfeiting was only a small part of trying to create a space of freedom, safety and wealth, to follow Christ in 的 Christlike way, and live that way together. He had a dream, that he shared with others around him, and he had come a long way, with all 的 others. I don’t 相信 约瑟·史密斯 was a criminal in his heart, but setting up a country to live his way of being Christlike made him make decissions that looked wrong, but could have worked out right, if he had had 的 chance to create it all, unfortunately he died too soon. But 的 information you brought makes it for me possible ‘to read between 的 lines’ or ‘hear in 的 silent spaces’ between 的 words you spoke and made me try to look at it through 的 eyes of Joseph. I 相信 Joseph was sincere in his heart and wanted to build 某事 good. I think he learned or regretted his faults, read D&C, but used 的 learned lessons to get himself further to walk 和live 的 way of, or with, Christ and create a space where others could do 的 same. To me 的 mormon church was a place like that, unfortunately patriarchy took over, and hopefully 的 nowadays leaders will return to create 的 church into a christlike place again. I 相信 约瑟·史密斯 wandered and pondered to be truly christlike and gave us a whole new church 的ory to live in love, light and christlike empathic attitude with heartfelt care and mature 情怀 of responsibility.

    再次非常感谢您的工作，以及John的出色播客!!!!!

    和平，
    阿德里·德·琼
    荷兰人

    回复

    1. In ”Mw。 阿德里·德·琼，一月30，2019在3:38下午’我想知道为什么从未谈论约瑟夫访问耶路撒冷的事：恩，也许他从未这样做过。

      我才发现‘History of 的 Netherlands Mission of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1861-1966’ at
      //scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6195&context=etd

      从第21页的互联网，第9至11页的第2章：
      荷兰宣教团（Orson）开幕’海德1840年访问荷兰：4月– june, on his journey to Palestine. He visited Rotterdam (not The Hague) and Amsterdam and he reported to 约瑟·史密斯. Orson Hyde was sent for a mission in Jerusalem, and 的 dutch mission was opened 20 years later around 1860.

      太糟糕了，没有约瑟夫·史密斯’一生的甜美脚触及了荷兰的地面！但是我’m glad I’能够纠正我的不良记忆！ ：o）

      和平，
      阿德里·德·琼
      荷兰人

      回复

  50. 非常感谢她的时间和学习。但是，如果JS可以通过伪造和/或其他方式赚钱（为什么他这样做了很多年），为什么还要经历整个制作书的过程。我珍视’t discount her 知道ledge but find it hard that she can leave mormonism with a convinced view of 神 and Jesus as well as 的 bible. Not all of us that leave mormonism discard 神 or a kind of belief…但是我们大多数人离开摩门教神时会感到…”I don;t 知道.” Wish she was a more polished speaker so that I could connect 的 dots better.

    非常感谢您抽出宝贵的时间在这一切上。

    回复

  51. 约翰，大约第4部分。 。 。那’s a lot of fear and anger being directed toward 某事 that you don’t 相信 exists!

    回复

发表评论

您的电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必需的地方已做标记 *

该网站使用Akismet减少垃圾邮件。 了解如何处理您的评论数据.