The Nehor wrote:This is the first time I've ever agreed with Nightlion. The Book of Mormon takes time to note how those who saw the events got to the Nephite side of the border.
Another blow to critics everywhere.
First time eh? Well then, let me just kick back a sec and take this all in. ahh!
for what it's worth when I saw your name on the line of this thread as the last poster I already knew. So this is truly momentous, heaven smiles. Probably, though, you wont go so far as to agree with that.
You provide the answer I would go with if I were an apologist. But, had the story of Amalickiah been common enough knowledge for the later conquered people to relate, the story never would have unfolded in the first place. You get what I'm saying?
Had it been a secret to a few, there would be a problem with credibility. If one of George W.'s associate came out many years after the fact and related George W. masterminding 911 and so on, well, that's not good enough reason to record it as history, even if it did so happen to be true.
If luck had it that none of those who relented to Moroni were in the conspiracy certainly after Teancum defeats Amalickiah and kills him in his tent there is little reason to keep the secret. Its not like he got away with anything.
I think we are bound to give your name to the Chair of Tabloid Criticism of Mormonism at Cassius University.
just me wrote:Isn't this why you have to believe that God revealed this stuff directly to the author in order for it to be included in the book?
I think you are right if one believes in absolute scriptural inerrancy.
I have often heard this idea expressed in the LDS Church, and expect it is also prevalent in other Bible-believing Christian denominations.
I think Mormons should not feel bound to such a position, as they expressly do not believe the scriptures are without error or interpolation.
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
I find that very strange statement coming from a Mormon... Christians have the wiggle room to deal with this kind of stuff, but Mormons don't. The book was translated character by character revealed by God, if the character wasn't right when the scribe wrote it, it would disappear and they would start again. The Bible, is through inspiration, Book of Mormon divine fiat.
Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)
consiglieri wrote:I believe similar things happen in the New Testament, such as the recounting of the conversation between Jesus and Pilate....
My favorite example is the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus is alone, and the closest witnesses are asleep. Yet we know exactly what Jesus prayed. And then within hours, without any time to tell his followers what was going on while they were asleep, Jesus is dead.
I brought this up on the FAIR board some time ago, and an apologist responded, "Obviously, Jesus told them about it during the 40 days he sojourned with them after the resurrection."
Obviously!
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
consiglieri wrote:I believe similar things happen in the New Testament, such as the recounting of the conversation between Jesus and Pilate....
My favorite example is the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus is alone, and the closest witnesses are asleep. Yet we know exactly what Jesus prayed. And then within hours, without any time to tell his followers what was going on while they were asleep, Jesus is dead.
I brought this up on the FAIR board some time ago, and an apologist responded, "Obviously, Jesus told them about it during the 40 days he sojourned with them after the resurrection."
Obviously!
How do they know Jesus wasn't just making crap up?
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die." - Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
ezravan wrote: I find that very strange statement coming from a Mormon... Christians have the wiggle room to deal with this kind of stuff, but Mormons don't. The book was translated character by character revealed by God, if the character wasn't right when the scribe wrote it, it would disappear and they would start again. The Bible, is through inspiration, Book of Mormon divine fiat.
Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)
I know many of what you define as Christians that would disagree with you that the Bible can have any inaccuracies. I have heard many, many Baptists for example say that the Bible is absolutely correct and contains no inaccuracies. Their justification for that is much like the Mormon church's justification: why would God allow a flawed document to be written when it's within his power to create a perfect document?
So, both Christians and Mormons (an artificial distinction -- but a topic for another time) are stuck with this problem.
"Joseph Smith was called as a prophet, dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb" -South Park
Analytics wrote:My favorite example is the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus is alone, and the closest witnesses are asleep.
They were close by and recorded one line, the opening line. It is no stretch to think one might remember the beginning before dozing off no? If they had the whole thing you might have a point.
Yet we know exactly what Jesus prayed.
No we don't.
And then within hours, without any time to tell his followers what was going on while they were asleep, Jesus is dead.
Have you read the Bible at all? They woke up when the arrest happened. One chopped off an ear and then they all fled. Peter (and probably John) then followed the legal proceedings that took place through the night and into the next day. Jewish and Roman courts were open to the public. All they had to do was show up. Peter denied knowing the accused at several points while this was going on.
I brought this up on the FAIR board some time ago, and an apologist responded, "Obviously, Jesus told them about it during the 40 days he sojourned with them after the resurrection."
Find a better apologist next time.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
ezravan wrote: I find that very strange statement coming from a Mormon... Christians have the wiggle room to deal with this kind of stuff, but Mormons don't. The book was translated character by character revealed by God, if the character wasn't right when the scribe wrote it, it would disappear and they would start again. The Bible, is through inspiration, Book of Mormon divine fiat.
Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)
I know many of what you define as Christians that would disagree with you that the Bible can have any inaccuracies. I have heard many, many Baptists for example say that the Bible is absolutely correct and contains no inaccuracies. Their justification for that is much like the Mormon church's justification: why would God allow a flawed document to be written when it's within his power to create a perfect document?
So, both Christians and Mormons (an artificial distinction -- but a topic for another time) are stuck with this problem.
your talking with a ex-mormon and i know what we do. and i know what you just did. If you can't defend the LDS scripture attack the Bible. you could not answer the question, so you had to move to something that has evidence, the Bible. Give me one, just one, evidence of the Book of Mormon and i will bow down to Joseph smith. What you don't realize is LDS has put it in the odd position of eternal truths revealed through the prophets. Baptist, Presbyterians, we are water and oil. What kind of Mormon would depend on a baptist account when we know as LDS that those baptist are outside of the true church. The only reason a Mormon would grab hold of a baptist is because they are desperate. they can't answer their own scripture, they must grab hold of something that might have substance. I know what your doing, and I know you have no evidence. The best thing a Mormon could do is to say, "we don't care about evidence, our burning in the bosom is enough" Give me that Mormon, and you will give me the only true Mormon.