[001]
209.20.103.246
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
So you\'re saying it must not be credible that there is an old world location called \
to:
So you\\\'re saying it must not be credible that there is an old world location called \\\"NHM\\\" that is a burial place exactly where the Book of Mormon narrative says there is a burial place called \\\"Nahom\\\" becuase if it were credible \\\"it would be all over Wikipedia.\\\"
There is an alternative: perhaps the Wikipedia community doesn\\\'t want to seem to be confirming Joseph Smith\\\'s preposterous story of being lead to golden plates by an angel, which they would be if they acknowledged that he got something right that he couldn\\\'t possibly have known about without divine help.
I would note that if the first option is your position then it rests on the idea that Wikipedia is an unbiased source of information, or that wiki authors have no personal agendas when they choose what to write about.
(Note that I mis-spelled \\\"Nahom\\\" in earlier entries, using the name of the Old Testament prophet Nahum rather than the spelling used for the burial place in the Book of Mormon. I apologize for not having checked my spelling.)
There is an alternative: perhaps the Wikipedia community doesn\\\'t want to seem to be confirming Joseph Smith\\\'s preposterous story of being lead to golden plates by an angel, which they would be if they acknowledged that he got something right that he couldn\\\'t possibly have known about without divine help.
I would note that if the first option is your position then it rests on the idea that Wikipedia is an unbiased source of information, or that wiki authors have no personal agendas when they choose what to write about.
(Note that I mis-spelled \\\"Nahom\\\" in earlier entries, using the name of the Old Testament prophet Nahum rather than the spelling used for the burial place in the Book of Mormon. I apologize for not having checked my spelling.)
