LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ah, excellent! I see skyrider44 continues with his evasions. Nothing like a good irrelevant quibble coupled to a bit of condescension to distract things.
 
skyrider, you are on a sceptic forum. Most posters here are adept at telling the difference between someone stating an opinion and someone making factual claims which require supporting evidence. The fact that you personally seem to have a problem telling the difference is illuminating, but it doesn't alter the fact that in the following post you quoted a source who claims that there is empirical evidence to support his assertions:

FAIR notes that there is growing evidence from New World archaeology that supports the BoM. Dr. John Clark has assembled a list of 60 items named in the BoM, including steel swords, barley, cement, thrones, and literacy. "In 1842, only eight (13.3%) of those 60 items were confirmed by archaeological evidence. Thus, in the mid-nineteenth century, archaeology did not support the claims made by the Book of Mormon. . . . [however] we find in 2005 that 45 of those 60 items (75%) have been confirmed"
(FAIR, "Archaeological Evidence and the Book of Mormon," Michael R. Ash).

Either point to that empirical evidence, or we will assume that Clark (like Smith) was making it up.
 
The "empirical data" point is irrelevant. You stated the claims as facts because you didn't say they constituted your opinion. I repeat: How are your readers to know when you are stating an opinion and when you are stating a fact?

Through general reading comprehension and understanding.
 
Sorry, your diversionary tactic won't work here.

This strikes me as projection. This entire line of protest is just a diversionary tactic on your part. Do you expect that it will distract anyone from the fact that you have not addressed the problems with the historical claims presented in the BoM?
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.
 
The "empirical data" point is irrelevant. You stated the claims as facts because you didn't say they constituted your opinion. I repeat: How are your readers to know when you are stating an opinion and when you are stating a fact? You would place that burden on them, wouldn't you? Opinions require some mitigating introduction, which can be accomplished with a short sentence or phrase. Why are you reluctant to do that? Do you fear it will weaken your argument?


So quibbling about other posters style is all you got left?

How does this help? you still have to explain why Joe placed horses, barley and steel in pre-contact America.

The fact that you can't and are now relying on distractions is painfully obvious.


Are you really trying to tell us that the Maya were the people of the BoM?
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.
Sorry, Janadele, you lost this argument many pages ago. In the collective opinion of this forum, The Book of Mormon is no more the word of God than The Silmarillion.
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.

...according to Skyrider, you are required to set opinions off with qualifiers...
 
Sorry, Janadele, you lost this argument many pages ago. In the collective opinion of this forum, The Book of Mormon is no more the word of God than The Silmarillion.
In your eyes maybe, but not in the eyes of God, which is all that matters.
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.

Actually, there's a great deal that can be said against the Book of Mormon by people "foolish" enough to use their brains and actually examine its claims. You are welcome to ignore its many problems in order to maintain your belief, but we aren't willing to pretend. There was no civilization created by Middle Eastern immigrants in America. Indigenous Americans are not descended from Middle Eastern immigrants. The papyri that Smith claimed to translate say nothing even remotely close to what he claimed they said. The Book of Mormon is not consistent with reality. It is, however, consistent with Joseph Smith having just made the whole thing up.
 
In your eyes maybe, but not in the eyes of God, which is all that matters.

Yours is but one of myriad gods whose followers make mutually exclusive claims to the possession of universal truth. Yours is but one in a sea of voices shouting, "My god is the real god!".
 
The "empirical data" point is irrelevant.

I think I've found your problem.

The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.

Well, that's convincing. All those historical and biological problems I found in the Book of Mormon just vanished into a magical puff of smoke. Point me to Kolob!
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it...

I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'consequence'.

This thread suggests to me that people who are not previously committed to accepting the BoM as divine and perfect take the news of its apparent conflicts with historical evidence as a good indication that the book was indeed made up by its originator. It seems obvious to me that those people are consequently less likely to ever become LDS. You might regard that as inconsequential, but I'd be surprised if so.
 
... Point me to Kolob!

'Kolob' is a term found in ancient records translated by Joseph Smith.
Joseph Smith did not provide a full description or explanation of Kolob nor did he assign the idea particular significance in relation to the Church’s core doctrines.

[SNIP for brevity, rest can be found here]

Edited by kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rule 4
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi, Janadele.

The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.

I see no reason whatsoever to think the BOM was transmitted by supernatural powers to Joseph Smith.
I see many reasons to consider the BOM to be a product of the times when it was written.


As for the BOA, it's all too apparent the work is a conscious fraud.
Why put your faith in such blatant cons?
 
The Book of Mormon is the word of God. There is nothing of consequence foolish mortals can say against it, no matter how much of their precious mortal probation time they waste on their efforts to fight the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Eternal law is eternal law and will always be so.


It is insistence on close-minded dogma such as this that the LDS Church is in decline.

God gave you intelligence, Janadele. You have His permission to use it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom