DiscussMormonism.com

It never ceases to amaze me how these apologists from BYU will use any insulated and isolated forum to promote their "scholarship" that can't make it in the secular world of real scholars. Gardner has started a thread at the MAD board claiming to show the best evidence for the Book of Mormon. Hamblin does the validating cheerleading! The thread is here:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... of-mormon/

Gardner, the New Mexico computer salesman (wanna be archeaologist), starts off the entire topic w telling everyone how they need to think and what should be accepted as evidence! Typical Mormon culture!! Hamblin waves his pom-poms and does the splits in motivational support!!

One poster, obviously using his/her common sense objects to the whole foundation of Gardner's presentation, and gets the wrath from the walls of the "Insulation Police - Pahoran". And Gardner goes on as if anything he speaks about has been acknowledged by a serious academic community outside of a Church fireside! I doubt this stuff has even gotten the attention of Michael Watson at Church HQ!!! (Perhaps Hamblin has a letter approving - but only Peterson can see it!!)

Do folks at that board really find sustenance is this suedo intellect because of it's isolation or will they ever ask where such "scholarship" even generates an interest outside of Provo??!!

Oh, gee, another character assassination by this joker. Who would have guessed?

Joey, you've never met the people you attack, yet you feel it is necessary to critiue their every move. Tell me, what did these academic people do to you?

Joey wrote:It never ceases to amaze me how these apologists from BYU will use any insulated and isolated forum to promote their "scholarship" that can't make it in the secular world of real scholars. Gardner has started a thread at the MAD board claiming to show the best evidence for the Book of Mormon. Hamblin does the validating cheerleading! The thread is here:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... of-mormon/

Gardner, the New Mexico computer salesman (wanna be archeaologist), starts off the entire topic w telling everyone how they need to think and what should be accepted as evidence! Typical Mormon culture!! Hamblin waves his pom-poms and does the splits in motivational support!!

One poster, obviously using his/her common sense objects to the whole foundation of Gardner's presentation, and gets the wrath from the walls of the "Insulation Police - Pahoran". And Gardner goes on as if anything he speaks about has been acknowledged by a serious academic community outside of a Church fireside! I doubt this stuff has even gotten the attention of Michael Watson at Church HQ!!! (Perhaps Hamblin has a letter approving - but only Peterson can see it!!)

Do folks at that board really find sustenance is this suedo intellect because of it's isolation or will they ever ask where such "scholarship" even generates an interest outside of Provo??!!

Mr. Joey,

The second Watson letter is the epitome of faith, and proves that the apologist is not a man of letters or science. The second Watson letter, after all, must first be believed, before it may be "seen". With one's spiritual eyes, one can see that is was really sent by Watson, not Carla Ogden. With one's spiritual eyes, one can see that it is actually signed. With one's spiritual eyes, one will see no similarities with the the ecclesiastically-unsupported verbiage from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism. One must have faith, in essence, to believe the GAs do not pronounce doctrine.

Regards,

Spider.

So as Gardner et al ramble on we get this salvo of desperation response from Hamblin on a Sunday afternoon:

Hamblin wrote:How utterly you misrepresent both the issues, methodology, and the evidence! Flabbergastering! Read Brant's books, or no one will take you seriously. Nor should they. 

So why haven't all the other experts read Gardner's six volumes of "ambien" yet?? Recognizing Gardner is a New Mexico computer salesman-(wanna be proclaimed archaeologist) that no one else pays attention to, why should anyone else, including members of the Lds church? Reknowned critical thinker expert said it best about experts: "An expert is someone who has succeeded in making decisions and judgements simpler through knowing what to pay attention to and what to ignore."

And as Dan Peterson admitted years ago, LDS scholarship in supporting the Book of Mormon has been ignored forever by the academic community. Let alone a computer salesman!! So why read Gardner, Sorenson, or Clark until the academic world can be convinced they have something of interest!!!

Spider-to-the-Fly wrote: One must have faith, in essence, to believe the GAs do not pronounce doctrine.

Well, they sure aren't receiving revelations...

harmony wrote:

Spider-to-the-Fly wrote: One must have faith, in essence, to believe the GAs do not pronounce doctrine.

Well, they sure aren't receiving revelations...

Dear harmony,

A sentiment we both share.

Regards,

Spider.

So the lesson that should be learned?????

When the best input for evidence of Book of Mormon historicity, on a church controlled board like MADB, comes from a computer salesman in New Mexico, can anyone really be surprised that LDS scholarship is ignored? Who else has it convinced to take an interest into outside of Provo????

well simine, Joey can at least spot BS when he sees it.

Joey wrote:Gardner, the New Mexico computer salesman (wanna be archeaologist), starts off the entire topic w telling everyone how they need to think and what should be accepted as evidence!

Brant's career is immaterial to his argument. Were we to posit that apologists must have degrees in the field they are supporting, we'd have to do the same for the critics.

Only those who have no rebuttal for the argument attack the messenger.

Joey wrote:So the lesson that should be learned?????

Don't use more than one question mark or exclamation point?