LDS

[Chaos]

I don't think anybody here has, or ever would, claim that everything can be known with the evidence that is now available. But there are plenty of individual things that can be known with the evidence that is now available. Expecting that new evidence will one day show that the BoM and the BoA are genuine is as unrealistic as expecting that new evidence will one day show that the earth is flat.

Who knows? Maybe one day evidence WILL show that those books are genuine. Then we can base our discussions on that evidence, and presumably come to the conclusion that the books are genuine.

But until then, we base our discussions on the evidence available NOW, which strongly suggests that the books are total BS.

 

[Pup]

Who knows? Maybe one day evidence WILL show that those books are genuine. Then we can base our discussions on that evidence, and presumably come to the conclusion that the books are genuine.

But until then, we base our discussions on the evidence available NOW, which strongly suggests that the books are total BS.

Yep.

Skyrider44's approach is more useful to address to the question: How can I keep believing that the Book of Abraham is a correctly-translated revelation?

"Our" approach is more useful to address the question: Is the Book of Abraham a correctly-translated revelation?

 

[pakeha]

...He has taken the position that maybe new evidence will still come forth explaining the contradictions between the Book of Abraham and the evidence currently available. ...

Wait a minute.
Are you saying anyone seriously believes the Egyptologists are wrongly translating the thousands of texts available from the Egyptian legacy?

 

[Craig4]

Wait a minute.
Are you saying anyone seriously believes the Egyptologists are wrongly translating the thousands of texts available from the Egyptian legacy?

I think there's some idea that the book could have multiple meanings. The mind reels though at the idea that an Egyptian Funerary text would somehow have some deeper meaning about Abraham.

 

[RoboTimbo]

You and others bash Christianity and Christians as if you're well-schooled in the faith. And here you are admitting that you don't understand a rudimentary belief Christians have about the advent of the millennium. I didn't expect you to accept that belief, but I did expect that you would at least be aware of it.

It appears that you have focused your understanding of Christianity and Mormonism in particular on everything and anything that is negative. In fact, your posts make that abundantly clear.

Here's your answer for the demonstrated and provable fraud committed by Joseph Smith:

My answer is simply this: I don't know.

You hardly have room to chastise others.

 

[RandFan]

However, Skyrider44 believes that all the information is not yet unsealed, so he can't comment further on the Book of Abraham, because he's still holding out hope that some unknown future evidence will solve the problems when all the "books" are unsealed and all the evidence is available.

Fallacies: Ad Hoc Explanations, Causes, and Rationalization

Bob: Hey Tim, I can fly to the moon by flapping my hands.
Tim: Cool, can I see?
Bob:I can't just do it any time that I want. I don't know the next time that I will be able to do it.

Formal logic can be hard so we should be generous to Sky, but I have harped on this issues of valid logic over and over. Either we are going to adhere to logic or we aren't.

There is no need for Skyrider to say anything if he is going to make this kind of plea (assuming that he is). As soon as you play that card then the discussion is over. If someone told Skyrider that they could fly to the Moon and back by flapping their arms. With the proviso that one cannot predict when it will happen, would he accept that?

If not then he can understand our predicament. The statement about events to happen is just ad hoc rationalization in order to rescue an otherwise demonstrable fraud, it is fallacious.

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

 

[Pup]

There is no need for Skyrider to say anything if he is going to make this kind of plea (assuming that he is). As soon as you play that card then the discussion is over.

I think that's the problem. He's given his answer in the earlier post I linked.

I think many LDS are disturbed by the BA development, as well as by DNA findings involving 'Lamanites.' You (and others) seek a direct, forthright answer from me re. the BA. My answer is simply this: I don't know. To my knowledge, the Church has not issued a statement re. the BA, and I am not inclined to second-guess the Church.

You may think my answer is a dodge; it is not. Having spent a long lifetime in the Church, and having witnessed the power of the priesthood to work modern-day miracles, I will remain a faithful, obedient member. You will consider that irrational in light of evidence that has surfaced. But you haven't lived the life I have lived; you haven't had the spiritual experiences I have had; you haven't seen the power of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ to change lives in the way I have.

So when people keep asking him to address the question, well, he's given his best answer. The discussion can't proceed because he's coming at it from a different direction where logic and evidence don't apply, even though we expect them to.

It would be as if a man insisted his wife was the most beautiful woman ever and people kept showing him photos of other women that most people would consider more beautiful, discussing facial symmetry and cultural norms, and asking him to defend his claim. When he answers I think she's the most beautiful because she's my wife and I love her, then the discussion can't proceed because more insistent questions about standards of beauty won't produce a different answer.

And that's where Skyrider44 is, if I'm interpreting correctly: the Book of Abraham is a true translation because it's part of his religion and he loves it.

 

[pakeha]

...And that's where Skyrider44 is, if I'm interpreting correctly: the Book of Abraham is a true translation because it's part of his religion and he loves it.

Pup, no matter how much sky claims to love his myth cycle, 2+2 doesn't equal 5.
Smith's fraudulent presentation of the BoA doesn't equal a translation.

 

[kellyb]

Pup, no matter how much sky claims to love his myth cycle, 2+2 doesn't equal 5.
Smith's fraudulent presentation of the BoA doesn't equal a translation.

Yeah, I have to chime in in defense of objective reality here.

Translation accuracy is not a matter of subjective personal taste, like beauty, and hoaxes, like people in monkey suits pretending to be BigFeet, aren't just as real as actual gorillas just because some people believe and wish really really hard.

 

[RandFan]

Pup, no matter how much sky claims to love his myth cycle, 2+2 doesn't equal 5.
Smith's fraudulent presentation of the BoA doesn't equal a translation.

Yeah, I have to chime in in defense of objective reality here.

Translation accuracy is not a matter of subjective personal taste, like beauty, and hoaxes, like people in monkey suits pretending to be BigFeet, aren't just as real as actual gorillas just because some people believe and wish really really hard.

Correct me if I'm wrong but this is precisely why the JREF exists. From astrology, to breatharians, to people who know that John Edwards talks to the dead, to the people who know that their leader is the messiah, to people who believe that they have been abducted by aliens and anal probed.

We are here to defend prosaic and parsimonious explanations, logic, reason, reality, facts, and, IMHO, human dignity. Believing in scams and falsehoods is to be a slave. What is particularly sad is that when it comes to Mormons, they are, in part, slaves to a dead confidence man.

Can we free people? Not many now but we can change the zeitgeist ever so slowly so that future generations will have fewer slaves. We can defend reality and reason.

"I freed a thousand slaves I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves." - Harriet Tubman

 

[pakeha]

...We are here to defend prosaic and parsimonious explanations, logic, reason, reality, facts, and, IMHO, human dignity. Believing in scams and falsehoods is to be a slave. What is particularly sad is that when it comes to Mormons, they are, in part, slaves to a dead confidence man.

You've said it better than I ever could, RandFan.

 

[deaman]

Correct me if I'm wrong but this is precisely why the JREF exists. From astrology, to breatharians, to people who know that John Edwards talks to the dead, to the people who know that their leader is the messiah, to people who believe that they have been abducted by aliens and anal probed.

We are here to defend prosaic and parsimonious explanations, logic, reason, reality, facts, and, IMHO, human dignity. Believing in scams and falsehoods is to be a slave. What is particularly sad is that when it comes to Mormons, they are, in part, slaves to a dead confidence man.

Can we free people? Not many now but we can change the zeitgeist ever so slowly so that future generations will have fewer slaves. We can defend reality and reason.

"I freed a thousand slaves I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves." - Harriet Tubman

Bingo!

 

[Olowkow]

I just downloaded a sample of The Righteous Mind. It sounds interesting from reading the Amazon intro. I found a video that gave me goose bumps, and I have been saving it for a relevant thread. I guess this is as good a time as any.

WATCH: I Used to Be in a Cult and Here's What It Did to My Brain | Diane Benscoter

I should mention that if you are interested enough to view the video, you should also read the story accompanying it. There is much more information in the text.

 

[fromdownunder]

to people who know that John Edwards talks to the dead

John Edward.

...sorry, pet peeve of mine. [/off topic]

Norm

 

[Frozenwolf150]

I hate to ask, but has anyone been following this thread from the beginning? Could someone PM me to get me caught up on the points of interest? This seems to be the most active discussion in the R&P section, which I frequent the most often, and I obviously don't have the time to read through all 193 pages of the topic. I've grown curious lately, given the number of regular members who have been posting here.

I personally don't know much about the LDS, not having studied Mormonism in comparative religions. I do know it's been in the spotlight in recent years with a presidential candidate, popular bestselling author, popular Fox News pundit, and popular Broadway play. I wish I had something to contribute, but I don't know where the topic stands at this moment.

 

[Foster Zygote]

slowvehicle ... how many times must the same content be repeated?

That's largely determined by you. How many times must we say, "But the Emperor is clearly naked", only to have you once again describe some detail of the Emperor's lavish accoutrements?

 

[Slowvehicle]

slowvehicle ... how many times must the same content be repeated?
I have already answered you above. These questions were not being referred to as anti-Mormon, they are however off topic, and will not be answered or further discussed in this LDS thread.

janadele: I will continue to ask the questions, until you provide substantive support for your allegations, or admit that you...how shall I say this generously?..."fudged" the truth. When you provide substantive, demonstrable evidence of a christian preacher who has been "gaoled" for refusing to do same-sex marriages, I will, after evaluating your evidence (remember that you tried to claim the Spence Lake Horse Hoax as support for horse culture in the pre-Colombian Americas) not ask you about the preacher again. As long as you continue to argue by urban legend assertion, I will keep asking.

If your allegations are off-topic, why did you bring them up, in this very thread?

You never did explain (another issue from this very thread) how any behaviour among consenting adults, in the privacy of their own demenses, can in any way have any affect upon you, at all...

 

[Locknar]

Everyone, back on topic and address the argument.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Everyone, back on topic and address the argument.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

Here Here.


So we have barley, A misogynistic and impotent mormon god and Snake Oil Joesph and his magic hat.

I know I'm missing a few talking points.

 

[RandFan]

Okay, how about you address the BoA? Why is there any reason to believe it's anything other than an Egyptian Funerary text? Why would Abraham include a secret message in language there is no reason to believe he could have written or read? Why on would Abraham do this with such an obviously polytheistic document?

Why shouldn't we accept the parsimonious answer, it is just a funery text. It was found with mummies. The Egyptians would bury their dead with funery texts. It was a sacred ritual. Why would they allow a blasphemous text (book of Abraham) to be included?