The voyage of Lehi and Company

[_maklelan]

Follow my posts.

Link me to them.

Your judgment is noted and discarded.

Can you do anything besides assert and dismiss?

Pull the other leg. I simply pointed out the inscription's deficiency as "evidence."

No, you simply asserted it. "Pointing out" requires some kind of logical support, of which you produced none.

Incidentally, the dupe who realizes he has been duped ceases being a dupe.

So your argument is still "Nu-uh!" I'm finished trying to have a grownup conversation with you.

[_Calculus Crusader]

Pull the other leg. I simply pointed out the inscription's deficiency as "evidence."

No, you simply asserted it. "Pointing out" requires some kind of logical support, of which you produced none.

To the contrary, I noted that without the vowels you cannot say NHM=Nahom. That's "some kind of logical support."

I'd say don't quit your day job but your day job appears to be shoveling Mormon b.s.

[_Morrissey]

If Scientology could identify a parallel supporting its story of Xenu et al, would you give it your consideration?

I give all evidence consideration.

How closely have you looked into it? Really? How many of the hundreds of strange beliefs have you seriously investigated to the point of doing what you're telling us we ought to do for Mormonism?

What about alien abductions? Jewish conspiracy? Fulong Gong? 911 conspiracies? The list goes on and on and on of strange beliefs in which adherents are absolutely, positively convinced they have evidence on their side. My brother, an otherwise very smart reasonable guy, believes that a place did not hit the Pentagon on 911, and that there's a massive cover up going on. And he has evidence to prove it. Why are you any different than any of these other smart people who believe weird things and have 'evidence' on their side?

Maklelan wants us to give parallels to the Book of Mormon our serious consideration. Yet many other beliefs religious, otherwise superstitious, conspiratorial, etc. can also point to 'parallels' or similar evidence put forward by Maklelan and other Mormon apologists. They demand of us that we treat their evidence seriously, but one cannot help but wonder whether they in turn take this other evidence seriously. (I think we all know the answer to this.)

I've taken the evidence for several religions seriously for years. You don't know jack about me, so keep your ignorant assumptions to yourself.

See above. You're right, I don't know jack about you, other than you believe in at least one stupid thing and that your view of good evidence in this case is sorely lacking.

I am, however, fairly confident assuming that you have not scratched the surface in investigating all the other claims out there, and that you do not consistently grant them the same level of consideration that you demand we grant Mormonism.

Honestly, if someone produced independent evidence that Xenu existed, you really want us to believe that you'd give that claim the same level of seriousness that you demand from us?

In other words, of all the religious, superstitious, conspiratorial, etc. beliefs out there, they want to privilege Mormonism above all the others where it comes to demanding serious consideration of evidence. Why? Well because it's what they believe, what they really, really want to believe, so it really, really, really must be truer than Scientology and all the rest. What they don't see is that to the rest of us, Mormonism is no more plausible in its claims than Scientology, alien abductions, Jehovah Witness, etc., etc. and thus no more demanding of serious consideration or the suspension of credulity.

See above.

See above redux.

[_maklelan]

How closely have you looked into it? Really? How many of the hundreds of strange beliefs have you seriously investigated to the point of doing what you're telling us we ought to do for Mormonism?

I've looked at a large portion of the beliefs of Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholicism, several Pentecostal branches, and even the Unification Church. The eastern religions I studied heavily before I joined the church, and I've practiced each to a small degree. The rest I studied after joining the church and coming into close contact with adherents in Texas and on my mission. I've always been interested in other belief systems.

What about alien abductions?

It's never really confronted me, so I've not spent much time with it,

Jewish conspiracy? Gulong Fong? 911 conspiracies? The list goes on and on and on of strange beliefs in which adherents are absolutely, positively convinced they have evidence on their side. My brother, an otherwise very smart reasonable guy, believes that a place did not hit the Pentagon on 911, and that there's a massive cover up going on. And he has evidence to prove it. Why are you any different than any of these other smart people who believe weird things and have 'evidence' on their side?

I've arrived at different conclusions, but I don't just flippantly dismiss any evidence. I can thoroughly evaluate it and decide it's not very supportive, or that it's been misunderstood, but I don't see much of that going on around here. What I see here is is flippant and naïve dismissal of evidence, supported by the assertion that the conclusion is too stupid to have to consider any evidence. I've never asserted that.

See above. You're right, I don't know jack about you, other than you believe in at least one stupid thing and that your view of good evidence in this case is sorely lacking.

Again, the assertion that a conclusion is so stupid that evidence, no matter how strong, needn't be considered. You make this assumption and then scoff at my ability to consider evidence. Bad form.

I am, however, fairly confident assuming that you have not scratched the surface in investigating all the other claims out there, and that you do not consistently grant them the same level of consideration that you demand we grant Mormonism.

You would be wrong there. I'm not demanding you accept evidence, I'm just asking you to be objective about things and actually look at evidence before you scoff at it. You can reject it all you want, but if I get the impression that you haven't really looked I'm going to point it out, and here not a one of you has objectively looked at the evidence.

Honestly, if someone produced independent evidence that Xenu existed, you really want us to believe that you'd give that claim the same level of seriousness that you demand from us?

Of course. I would be a hypocrite to demand objectivity of others and not of myself. Most of the people here seem to prefer to just assume everyone is as lacking in objectivity as they are. That kind of projection is abhorrent, and I'll thank you and everyone else here to stop ignorantly telling me how I view the world.

See above redux.

Back at ya.

[_Morrissey]

How closely have you looked into it? Really? How many of the hundreds of strange beliefs have you seriously investigated to the point of doing what you're telling us we ought to do for Mormonism?

I've looked at a large portion of the beliefs of Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholicism, several Pentecostal branches, and even the Unification Church. The eastern religions I studied heavily before I joined the church, and I've practiced each to a small degree. The rest I studied after joining the church and coming into close contact with adherents in Texas and on my mission. I've always been interested in other belief systems.

Fair enough. You've gone way, way beyond what most people do. You have my admiration for this. Seriously.

What about alien abductions?

It's never really confronted me, so I've not spent much time with it,

Off hand, how much credence do you give it?

Jewish conspiracy? Gulong Fong? 911 conspiracies? The list goes on and on and on of strange beliefs in which adherents are absolutely, positively convinced they have evidence on their side. My brother, an otherwise very smart reasonable guy, believes that a place did not hit the Pentagon on 911, and that there's a massive cover up going on. And he has evidence to prove it. Why are you any different than any of these other smart people who believe weird things and have 'evidence' on their side?

I've arrived at different conclusions, but I don't just flippantly dismiss any evidence. I can thoroughly evaluate it and decide it's not very supportive, or that it's been misunderstood, but I don't see much of that going on around here. What I see here is is flippant and naïve dismissal of evidence, supported by the assertion that the conclusion is too stupid to have to consider any evidence. I've never asserted that.

And here's where you've gone off the track. I've spent 40 years living Mormonism. I suspect many here have a similar experience. We are not flippantly or naïvely dismissing it. We have reached a judgment based on decades of thought, action, investigation, discussion, listening, and so forth. Before I made the break with Mormonism, I spent literally years agonizing over my beliefs.

You are the one being flippant and naïve here.

See above. You're right, I don't know jack about you, other than you believe in at least one stupid thing and that your view of good evidence in this case is sorely lacking.

Again, the assertion that a conclusion is so stupid that evidence, no matter how strong, needn't be considered. You make this assumption and then scoff at my ability to consider evidence. Bad form.

Bad form perhaps in polite debate but entirely justifiable. A stupid conclusion based on acceptance of the fantastic, magical, and implausible does not merit serious consideration. I will not waste my time investigating the varied 'evidences' of Mormonism any more than I'll waste time investigating the evidences of global conspiracies. The stupid, illogical, superstitious, implausible, offensive, morally deficient (all of which in my opinion describe Mormonism) do not merit further serious investigation.

I am, however, fairly confident assuming that you have not scratched the surface in investigating all the other claims out there, and that you do not consistently grant them the same level of consideration that you demand we grant Mormonism.

You would be wrong there.

But I'm not.

I'm not demanding you accept evidence, I'm just asking you to be objective about things and actually look at evidence before you scoff at it. You can reject it all you want, but if I get the impression that you haven't really looked I'm going to point it out, and here not a one of you has objectively looked at the evidence.

Why do I have any obligation to look at evidence before I scoff at it? Should I apply the same standard to my brother's belief that 911 is a government conspiracy? I have no moral or intellectual obligation to objectively consider the evidence for self-evidentally silly conclusions.

Honestly, if someone produced independent evidence that Xenu existed, you really want us to believe that you'd give that claim the same level of seriousness that you demand from us?

Of course. I would be a hypocrite to demand objectivity of others and not of myself. Most of the people here seem to prefer to just assume everyone is as lacking in objectivity as they are. That kind of projection is abhorrent, and I'll thank you and everyone else here to stop ignorantly telling me how I view the world.

But I'm not lacking in objectivity. See my discussion above.

I'm not telling you how you view the world, I am only reacting to your view of the world that you have chosen to reveal to us. I am sure that you are a very bright, capable person. But I can only conclude, and I'm sorry if this offends you, that your beliefs viz Mormonism are, well, stupid. It's probably an anomaly in an otherwise stellar consolation of well-reasoned and rational beliefs, but you gotta admit, it's a whopper of an anomaly.

[_William Schryver]

LessUsee:

A stupid conclusion based on acceptance of the fantastic, magical, and implausible does not merit serious consideration. I will not waste my time investigating the varied 'evidences' of Mormonism any more than I'll waste time investigating the evidences of global conspiracies. The stupid, illogical, superstitious, implausible, offensive, morally deficient (all of which in my opinion describe Mormonism) do not merit further serious investigation.

This is a classic example of my favorite kinds of quotes from the “objective” thinkers here in the GSTP™.

It’s when I read things like this that I feel myself inclined to respond such as I recently did to “JohnStuartMill,” another of the arrogantly assured apostates who are so curiously drawn to this message board:

I know that one day you'll come to see the extent and gravity of your error. Until then, I can satisfy any desire I have for vindication with the delicious assurance that you'll eventually have to face the devastating reality of God saying to you:

Did I not declare my words unto you, which were written by this man, like as one crying from the dead, yea, even as one speaking out of the dust?

Like Moroni, I am able to deflect your derision and scorn with the calm confidence that:

... God shall show unto you, that that which I have written is true.

So feel free to fill up your cup while you can. I'd try to dissuade you from persisting in heaping up such a pile of the wrath of God, but I think we both know it's a little late for that.

Right?

[_harmony]

This is a classic example of my favorite kinds of quotes from the “objective” thinkers here in the GSTP™.

It’s when I read things like this that I feel myself inclined to respond such as I recently did to “JohnStuartMill,” another of the arrogantly assured apostates who are so curiously drawn to this message board...

In other words, you make lame comments because you have no argument against his comments. Lame, lame, lame, William. And typical.

[_Morrissey]

LessUsee:

A stupid conclusion based on acceptance of the fantastic, magical, and implausible does not merit serious consideration. I will not waste my time investigating the varied 'evidences' of Mormonism any more than I'll waste time investigating the evidences of global conspiracies. The stupid, illogical, superstitious, implausible, offensive, morally deficient (all of which in my opinion describe Mormonism) do not merit further serious investigation.

This is a classic example of my favorite kinds of quotes from the “objective” thinkers here in the GSTP™.

True enough. As objective thinkers, we are able to separate the reasonable from the unreasonable from the truly ludicrous. Mormonism falls in the final category.

Thanks for the compliment.

[_Calculus Crusader]

LessUsee:
This is a classic example of my favorite kinds of quotes from the “objective” thinkers here in the GSTP™.

It’s when I read things like this that I feel myself inclined to respond such as I recently did to “JohnStuartMill,” another of the arrogantly assured apostates who are so curiously drawn to this message board:

I know that one day you'll come to see the extent and gravity of your error. Until then, I can satisfy any desire I have for vindication with the delicious assurance that you'll eventually have to face the devastating reality of God saying to you:

Did I not declare my words unto you, which were written by this man, like as one crying from the dead, yea, even as one speaking out of the dust?

Like Moroni, I am able to deflect your derision and scorn with the calm confidence that:
... God shall show unto you, that that which I have written is true.

So feel free to fill up your cup while you can. I'd try to dissuade you from persisting in heaping up such a pile of the wrath of God, but I think we both know it's a little late for that.

Right?

If JSM winds up in hell, it will be with Joseph Smith, Jr. (albeit, in different circles.)

[_maklelan]

Fair enough. You've gone way, way beyond what most people do. You have my admiration for this. Seriously.

Thank you.

Off hand, how much credence do you give it?

I don't dogmatically deny the existence of life beyond earth, but I haven't committed to any particular conclusion.

And here's where you've gone off the track. I've spent 40 years living Mormonism. I suspect many here have a similar experience. We are not flippantly or naïvely dismissing it. We have reached a judgment based on decades of thought, action, investigation, discussion, listening, and so forth. Before I made the break with Mormonism, I spent literally years agonizing over my beliefs.

You're speaking generally about Mormonism, not specifically about Nahom, which is the topic of this thread and the evidence to which I alluded. I've seen no indication anyone is any more aware of the topic than they would become simply by reading this thread.

You are the one being flippant and naïve here.

No I'm not.

Bad form perhaps in polite debate but entirely justifiable. A stupid conclusion based on acceptance of the fantastic, magical, and implausible does not merit serious consideration. I will not waste my time investigating the varied 'evidences' of Mormonism any more than I'll waste time investigating the evidences of global conspiracies.

And I don't reject any possibilities simply because they conflict with the worldview my subjective experience has painted for me.

The stupid, illogical, superstitious, implausible, offensive, morally deficient (all of which in my opinion describe Mormonism) do not merit further serious investigation.

And to describe Mormonism as "offensive," and "morally deficient" clearly betrays a serious lack of objectivity. Say what you will about beliefs and worldviews, but Mormonism can't objectively be called morally deficient.

But I'm not.

Yes, you are.

Why do I have any obligation to look at evidence before I scoff at it? Should I apply the same standard to my brother's belief that 911 is a government conspiracy? I have no moral or intellectual obligation to objectively consider the evidence for self-evidentally silly conclusions.

If you refuse to respect the standards of objectivity then stop bitching about the apologists' perceived lack of objectivity.

But I'm not lacking in objectivity. See my discussion above.

Where you said you don't care about being objective if you a priori know something isn't true?
You're very clearly lacking objectivity.

I'm not telling you how you view the world, I am only reacting to your view of the world that you have chosen to reveal to us. I am sure that you are a very bright, capable person. But I can only conclude, and I'm sorry if this offends you, that your beliefs viz Mormonism are, well, stupid. It's probably an anomaly in an otherwise stellar consolation of well-reasoned and rational beliefs, but you gotta admit, it's a whopper of an anomaly.

I can be honest with myself and I can be comfortable knowing that I'm objective with everything I come across. You prefer to prejudge what paradigms do and do not deserve objectivity or even consideration.