Shout out to RenegadeofPhunk!!!

[_beastie]

Still waiting for your reply to this:

Quote:
I agree with Orson. And it's not a fraud. After careful examination, and consulting with my deficient brain and pathetic emotions - I have concluded it's genuine.

I will now enter the Hall of Infamy of those who support the Book of Mormon. I love and crave matryrdom. Joseph is my idol. Sorry to disappoint those who thought DCP was number one in my books.



So do you concede that others have, after careful examination, concluded that it's a fraud?

And that they have a moral obligation to share that information?

[_marg]

Oh marg, you're such a darling. The "expert" on Mormonism who has never read the Book of Mormon. And now you ask, "whooooooooooo is Orson?" He's related to arsonists, you know, those people who start forest fires?

No I've never claimed to be an expert on Mormonism, nor tried to represent myself as an expert in that area. My interest relating to religion and in particular Mormonism, is critical thinking which I also don't claim to be an expert of, nor have I ever claimed to be. I've looked at aspects relating to Mormonism perhaps in more depth than you have such as the Spalding theory, or genetic evidence of the migration route in the world based on evidence available of the first modern man...to give some examples. If there is anything I believe about my thinking which you would probably object to it's that I have a fairly good B.S. detector. And that doesn't just relate to religion. I can tell you without reading every word in the Book of Mormon or without meeting J. Smith personally, or without a personal conversation with some supreme being that the claims of Mormonism are B.S. The evidence is so high, that to view claims of Mormonism otherwise is foolishness or intellectual dishonesty. The vast majority of Mormons are either unaware of evidence in order to evaluate effectively or are not interested or motivated to search out critical information. I don't view everyone Mormon on message boards as foolish.

That Mormonism claims are a pile of B.S. is not to say that affiliation with the church or that all its teachings can not be beneficial to individuals. Of course what is of greater concern, is whether the benefits if they exist for any individual outweigh the costs. And I am not suggesting that other religious claims by other groups besides those of Mormonism, which involve the supernatural or the extraordinary are not B.S. particularly if they are presented and expected to be believed as literally true, as the claims of Mormonism have been presented.

[_Dr. Shades]

Does this board have any archive system, I wonder? I'd like to see it saved.

The thread parsing feature--the one which erases threads after an administrador-designated time period of thread inactivity has passed--is turned off. Therefore, all threads are automatically archived inasmuch as they aren't deleted.

Which is a fancy way of saying that this thread (and all other threads) will always be here. A link to it now will always work.

[_KimberlyAnn]

Still waiting for your reply to this:

Quote:
I agree with Orson. And it's not a fraud. After careful examination, and consulting with my deficient brain and pathetic emotions - I have concluded it's genuine.

I will now enter the Hall of Infamy of those who support the Book of Mormon. I love and crave matryrdom. Joseph is my idol. Sorry to disappoint those who thought DCP was number one in my books.



So do you concede that others have, after careful examination, concluded that it's a fraud?

And that they have a moral obligation to share that information?

I'm also waiting for Ray to answer this question. It's straightforward and I'm wondering why he's avoiding it.

As an exmormon, I do feel a moral obligation to share the information that the Book of Mormon is a fraud. I do not go up and down neighborhoods knocking on doors uninvited, like the Mormon missionaries do, but I have stopped by two homes that I noticed the missionaries were frequenting. I had met both families previously. I briefly shared information with them about the Mormon church and was asked to return to speak to them later, which I did. Both families discontinued the discussions with the missionaries. I could not, in good conscience, do nothing and let those families join the Mormon church. They were not being told the whole truth by the missionaries.

Sharing the information that the Book of Mormon is a fraud is something I do judiciously. I've simply told my Mormon family members that I no longer believe the church to be true or the Book of Mormon to be of any kind of divine origin. If they inquire as to specifics, I offer them. If not, I'm silent. I do not impose my disbelief on anyone. I do not belittle them for their belief, consign them to hell or harass them with literature, threats, emails, letters or phone calls, though they do all of those things to me. I have kept fairly good relationships with my Mormon family by turning the other cheek. In my real-life experience, the harassment and name calling has been all one sided and directed at me by Mormons.

Responding to the harassment of Mormons in my family isn't really an option if I want to maintain a decent relationship with them. They believe ANY response on my part is an attack on their religion and therefore a personal attack on them. They're blind to their hypocrisy. For some reason, they feel the right, the obligation to harass me, yet telling them I'll never be a Mormon again because I believe Joseph Smith lied offends their delicate sensibilities. Somehow, they feel justified sending me Ensign subscriptions for my birthday, asking me not do drink coffee in front of them IN MY OWN HOME, asking me to baby-sit their large broods of children but reminding me to take the beer out of the fridge first...good grief! And you know what? I generally comply with their demands and take their harassment with a smile because I love them. Sometimes I draw the line, like emptying the fridge of beer, and they're always upset when I do. My refusal to hide or throw out three bottles of Sam Adams means I'm a bitter apostate. But not so bitter that they won't leave their kids with me anyway.

Well, I got off on a tangent. Sorry, I'm prone to do that. To reiterate, I do feel a moral obligation to share information about Mormonism with innocent people who are being courted by well-meaning church members. I understand the members think they're helping people. But investigators deserve the whole truth upfront - before they're baptized. And if I have the opportunity to share the whole truth with them then I will. I'm sure Orson would have considered my approach reasonable, perhaps even moral.

KA

[_Ray A]

Still waiting for your reply to this:

Quote:
I agree with Orson. And it's not a fraud. After careful examination, and consulting with my deficient brain and pathetic emotions - I have concluded it's genuine.

I will now enter the Hall of Infamy of those who support the Book of Mormon. I love and crave matryrdom. Joseph is my idol. Sorry to disappoint those who thought DCP was number one in my books.



So do you concede that others have, after careful examination, concluded that it's a fraud?

And that they have a moral obligation to share that information?

I already replied, but apparently you're very slow. Your "moral obligation" is subjective. But being the arrogant ass you are, you can't see otherwise. Will you admit that your "moral obligation" is subjective? I haven't see this.

I have never read where you referred to the Book of Mormon as a fraud. In fact, you've championed the idea that the Church should accept it as pseudepigrahpa!! You were cool with that. So what were you saying? That the Church should accept fradulent scripture in the name of pseudepigrapha? You thought, all along, it was a blatant fraud, yet you couched your opinions in nice sounding language. You try to come across as a "voice of reason", when in your heart you firmly believe that the Book of Mormon is a blatant fraud!! Why I ever defended you in anything now makes me extremely embarrassed. Give me Steve Benson before your backstabbing hypocrisy anyday!

YOU, b***, will be one of the reasons I never trust exmos again.

[_harmony]

Still waiting for your reply to this:

Quote:
I agree with Orson. And it's not a fraud. After careful examination, and consulting with my deficient brain and pathetic emotions - I have concluded it's genuine.

I will now enter the Hall of Infamy of those who support the Book of Mormon. I love and crave matryrdom. Joseph is my idol. Sorry to disappoint those who thought DCP was number one in my books.



So do you concede that others have, after careful examination, concluded that it's a fraud?

And that they have a moral obligation to share that information?

I already replied, but apparently you're very slow. Your "moral obligation" is subjective. But being the arrogant ass you are, you can't see otherwise. Will you admit that your "moral obligation" is subjective? I haven't see this.

I have never read where you referred to the Book of Mormon as a fraud. In fact, you've championed the idea that the Church should accept it as pseudepigrahpa!! You were cool with that. So what were you saying? That the Church should accept fradulent scripture in the name of pseudepigrapha? You thought, all along, it was a blatant fraud, yet you couched your opinions in nice sounding language. You try to come across as a "voice of reason", when in your heart you firmly believe that the Book of Mormon is a blatant fraud!! Why I ever defended you in anything now makes me extremely embarrassed. Give me Steve Benson before your backstabbing hypocrisy anyday!

YOU, b***, will be one of the reasons I never trust exmos again.

She didn't say she was one of the "others" she refers to, Ray. You're reading more into her question than she stated. Try to not do that. It makes you look stupid. Oh, nevermind. Too late. You've looked stupid for 9 pages of this thread. Why change now?

[_Jersey Girl]

harm

It makes you look stupid. Oh, nevermind. Too late. You've looked stupid for 9 pages of this thread. Why change now?

ROTFLMAO!!!

Jersey Girl

[_Ray A]

She didn't say she was one of the "others" she refers to, Ray. You're reading more into her question than she stated. Try to not do that. It makes you look stupid. Oh, nevermind. Too late. You've looked stupid for 9 pages of this thread. Why change now?

In your humble biased opinion. I'm relieved to know I look "stupid" in your eyes. Having credibility with you would make me seriously worried.

[_beastie]

Ray,

This was your original answer:

I agree with Orson. And it's not a fraud. After careful examination, and consulting with my deficient brain and pathetic emotions - I have concluded it's genuine.

This is an ambiguous answer in regards to whether or not other people could genuinely believe it to be a fraud that needed to be exposed. I wanted you to be very explicit in your answer, because your "theme" right now is that exmormons who attack the church are evil people who inspire future acts of violence. These two ideas - that individuals perceive they have a moral responsibility to expose a fraud versus evil Lutherites are very different, incompatible assertions.

So which is it?

Of course moral obligation is subjective. It always is. This does not alter my point, which is that: individuals perceiving they have a moral obligation to expose a fraud versus evil Lutherites are contradictory assertions.

I'm an atheist, Ray, you've known this for years. So, on some level, I view all religion that claims to speak for a God I do not believe exists or speaks, as a fraud. That does not mean that the believers do not genuinely believe in the merchandise they market.

To be more specific, I believe the Book of Mormon is a provable fraud in terms of being an ancient American document. I do feel a moral obligation to share the information that has led me to that conclusion. Book of Mormon apologists quite consistently make misleading statements to readers that those same readers will never, never spot unless they already possess a certain level of background knowledge about ancient Mesoamerica,and the vast majority of people do not possess that knowledge. That is why I took the time to write my zarahemla essays.

I do not care whether Mormons, or anyone, accept the Book of Mormon as pseudographia. I am an atheist. I don't believe there is any God inspiring people to write sacred texts, whether they be the Book of Mormon, the Bible, or the Koran. But this is an entirely subjective religious belief, and I have no desire to argue that. I can only hope that this belief does not lead to socially destructive behavior. So when I say I would be "ok" with pseudographia, that does not mean I would believe it myself, but just that I have no desire or need to argue that point. I have never argued that point with people, either. I have always focused on the one argument that I think needs to be exposed - that there is evidence to support the belief that the Book of Mormon is an ancient american document.

But Orson's statement has larger significance than the Book of Mormon alone. The church itself makes audacious claims, claims that, if true, would have eternal impact on all of us. I do believe the church itself is a fraud in that manner, like any other religion that makes those sort of claims. No unbaptized infants are going to hell (past "one true" catholic church teaching). No "unsaved" people are going to be left on the earth to suffer horrible events after the "saved" go up to heaven. And no church has the "one true" authority to baptize people as an entry key to where God lives. These are all fraudulent claims. I do not care whether or not the people who preach them genuinely believe them - in the vast majority of cases I believe that they do.

This does not mean I can "prove" this in ways that would satisfy True Believers. Nohting satisfies True Believers. The members of Heaven's Gate knew that no spaceship was visible in the tail of the Hale comet, but that didn't alter their belief. But it was possible to provide evidence that could have helped non True Believers abandon those beliefs.

I do feel a moral responsibility to share information that could help non True Believers be able to make informed decisions about their beliefs. If none of this information was already "out there", on the web, I would probably work to provide that information. But since that information is already there and fairly easily obtained by those who are actively looking for information, I only focus on the one area where I find a lack of information, which happens to coincide with my interest in ancient Mesoamerica.

I do not believe Mormons "should" lose faith or leave the church. That is a decision entirely up to them. I do believe that if Mormons are looking for information to help them evaluate their belief system, and I have reliable information that they may need to do so, that I have a moral obligation to share that information.

I would feel the same way if I had reliable information that demonstrated a heavily advertised product did not do what its sellers claim. I rely on other people feeling the same level of moral obligation and acting on it, so when I look for information to help me make informed decisions, I will find it. Reciprocal Altruism.

You cannot accept this principle - that people may genuinely believe that they have reliable information that proves the claims of the church are fraudulent and may speak out due to a perceived moral obligation - and at the same time accept and publicize your generalizations and accusations about exmormons who attack the church as you have on this thread.

If you can logically and reasonably explain how you can hold such opposing, contradictory ideas at the same time, please share.

[_beastie]

I have never read where you referred to the Book of Mormon as a fraud. In fact, you've championed the idea that the Church should accept it as pseudepigrahpa!! You were cool with that. So what were you saying? That the Church should accept fradulent scripture in the name of pseudepigrapha? You thought, all along, it was a blatant fraud, yet you couched your opinions in nice sounding language. You try to come across as a "voice of reason", when in your heart you firmly believe that the Book of Mormon is a blatant fraud!! Why I ever defended you in anything now makes me extremely embarrassed. Give me Steve Benson before your backstabbing hypocrisy anyday!

YOU, b***, will be one of the reasons I never trust exmos again.

This is quite consistent with the irrationality you have demonstrated on this entire thread.

On one hand, you proclaim that the vitriol of people like Benson will inspire future acts of violence, and we ALL will have blood on our hands because we didn't speak out against him.

Now you proclaim that he is preferable to someone like me, who has used "nice sounding language" to criticize the same belief system.

So what is it, Ray? This leads me to conclude that what you object to isn't inflammatory "hate speech", but rather you object to honest criticisms of church truth claims.

I don't think you're being honest with yourself about this issue. On one hand, you "agree" with Orson, but when I do exactly what Orson said - work to expose what I do believe to be provably fraudulent about the Book of Mormon - while openly being an atheist who could not possibly accept pseudographia as actually coming from God - you proclaim I am worse than benson.

by the way, do you accept that if some unbalanced individual reads your words, concludes that exmormon critics are evil Lutherites who will inspire future Nazi violence, and engages in physical violence against me, or some other exmormon - will you accept that our blood is on your hands?