DiscussMormonism.com

in my opinion the best argument that Apologists make against critics of the church on the Book of Mormon is this. "If Joseph Smith's official story on the Book of Mormon as taught by the church for most of its history isn't true then who wrote the Book of Mormon?" The critics have many ideas but no definitive answers. They just give a "deer in the headlights" blank stare.

in my opinion the best argument that critics make against apologists of the church on the Book of Mormon is this. "Where are the literal descendants of Father Lehi today?" Some apologists might scoff at this. But when the rubber hits the road they have no official answers and they can't even produce ONE actual human being. And anyone with any honesty/integrity and good knowledge on this topic knows there is a long history of real teachings in the church on there being actual real human beings in our day who are literal descendants of Father Lehi. See http://www.bing.com/search?q=descendant ... te:LDS.org for some research material.

What have the apologists done on this for the past decade? For starts none of them have made me 1K poorer in stepping up to the plate and identifying at least one of these literal descendants. See http://pacumenispages.yuku.com/topic/56 ... cholarship for details. And I recently renewed this offer and have 2 people volunteering to match my amount so I am up to 3K - i.e. http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com/201 ... -post.html. And why in the world would anyone dare to be an Apologist in such a vacuum? Do they have any integrity and honesty in their hearts and minds? If they do then in my opinion they should step up to the plate. I'm waiting.

degaston wrote:in my opinion the best argument that Apologists make against critics of the church on the Book of Mormon is this. "If Joseph Smith's official story on the Book of Mormon as taught by the church for most of its history isn't true then who wrote the Book of Mormon?" The critics have many ideas but no definitive answers. They just give a "deer in the headlights" blank stare.

If this is the best argument apologists have, they are in really bad shape. This is nothing more than a weak argument from ignorance.

The choice is either
1. - some combination of Smith, Rigdon, Cowdery, and Spalding wrote it, or
2. - it came about by magic.

Okay, I will admit that, for some folks, this may be a difficult choice to make. But it is not very difficult for the overwhelming majority of people who have ever considered the Book of Mormon.

Hi, there, Degaston.

Your offer is really quite extraordinary and generous--you deserve tons of kudos. It's worth asking: Why is there no Mopologetic equivalent to your scholarship? Why isn't the Church--or wealthy Church members--putting up cash rewards like this for budding young Mormon scholars? Why not offer a substantial cash prize to anyone who can, say, find physical evidence for Book of Mormon historicity? Why not money for medical research on priesthood blessings, or money to research the protective properties of temple garments?

It's really telling, I think. The actual funding doesn't go towards scholarships like this. Instead, the Church bankrolls professional fundraisers like Ed Snow to go and leech money from wealthy Mormons in order to fund smear campaigns in the pages of the FARMS Review. It's just such a bizarre and wrong-headed mindset. They could be using the money to pay for actual, faith-bolstering results; instead, they are paying for hit men.

degaston wrote:in my opinion the best argument that Apologists make against critics of the church on the Book of Mormon is this. "If Joseph Smith's official story on the Book of Mormon as taught by the church for most of its history isn't true then who wrote the Book of Mormon?" The critics have many ideas but no definitive answers. They just give a "deer in the headlights" blank stare.

This is quite normal. There are many examples of things we don't know the whole mechanics of. How many criminals are convicted even though we don't know many details of how it was done, only that it was and they are guilty. Runtu gave a good example of this with a counterfeit dollar bill. We may not know how it was done even though we may know it is not a real one.

Wit the Book of Mormon it was either from God or made up. If made up, it was obviously done in secrecy, which means most of the evidence will not exist today. Problem is there is plenty of evidence that tells us it is counterfeit even though we don't know the details of exactly how or by who.

The Book of Mormon is not very complex. Even as a believer I could see this even though many members would always see new things. It reminded of the scifi fantasy geek who would always see new things in their favorite book or movie.

This really is stupid. If you are going to believe the Book of Mormon based on history, archeological, or any other types of scientific evidence; then you'll find a disturbing lack of any evidence or in most cases evidence to the contrary. It is an exercise in futility and idiocy in my opinion. There is no good reason to believe in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ, or the accounts in the Bible on those grounds. The genesis account for example has been refuted by science, there is no evidence of a world-wide flood, and people don't come back from the dead either. Case closed.

The only reason to believe in any of this stuff is if God tells you it is true. Without that, it is stupid to believe in such non-sense and it is an obvious fraud.

Tobin wrote:This really is stupid. If you are going to believe the Book of Mormon based on history, archeological, or any other types of scientific evidence; then you'll find a disturbing lack of any evidence or in most cases evidence to the contrary. It is an exercise in futility and idiocy in my opinion. There is no good reason to believe in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ, or the accounts in the Bible on those grounds. The genesis account for example has been refuted by science, there is no evidence of a world-wide flood, and people don't come back from the dead either. Case closed.

The only reason to believe in any of this stuff is if God tells you it is true. Without that, it is stupid to believe in such non-sense and it is an obvious fraud.

But you tell us all kinds of things that are right or wrong, but how do you know if you think God came only once to you and unsought for? Not to mention those others who claim God talked to them and they don't believe in the Book of Mormon. I imagine if you had grown up as a hindu it would have been a hindu God who came to you.

Tobin wrote:This really is stupid. If you are going to believe the Book of Mormon based on history, archeological, or any other types of scientific evidence; then you'll find a disturbing lack of any evidence or in most cases evidence to the contrary. It is an exercise in futility and idiocy in my opinion. There is no good reason to believe in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ, or the accounts in the Bible on those grounds. The genesis account for example has been refuted by science, there is no evidence of a world-wide flood, and people don't come back from the dead either. Case closed.

The only reason to believe in any of this stuff is if God tells you it is true. Without that, it is stupid to believe in such non-sense and it is an obvious fraud.

There will never be irrefutable physical, scientific, historical, or archaeological, evidence to prove to anyone that the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ or the accounts in the Bible are true. It all requires faith and personal revelation. The fact that these things require faith and personal revelation doesn't make them any less true.

GR33N wrote:
There will never be irrefutable physical, scientific, historical, or archaeological, evidence to prove to anyone that the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ or the accounts in the Bible are true. It all requires faith and personal revelation. The fact that these things require faith and personal revelation doesn't make them any less true.

It makes them less likely to be true. Whats worse though is that LDS truth claims have evdience which shows that it is incorrect, which is far worse then just a lack of evidence. Requiring faith really is the conman's game, becuase they know that all they got. God would have to be stupid to ask this of people, and I am talking about most religious faith, which is blind faith.

Where are Antinephiticumr, Zelph, Cinewatha,
Droopaulicum and Quetzalcoatl,
The weak of will, the strong of arm, the clown,
the boozer, the fighter?
All, all, are sleeping on the hill.

One passed in a fever,
One was burned in a mine,
One was killed in a brawl,
One died in a jail,
One fell from a bridge escaping from wild tapirs—
All, all are sleeping, sleeping, sleeping on the hill.

moksha wrote:Where are Antinephiticumr, Zelph, Cinewatha,
Droopaulicum and Quetzalcoatl,
The weak of will, the strong of arm, the clown,
the boozer, the fighter?
All, all, are sleeping on the hill.

One passed in a fever,
One was burned in a mine,
One was killed in a brawl,
One died in a jail,
One fell from a bridge escaping from wild tapirs—
All, all are sleeping, sleeping, sleeping on the hill.

Moksha,

Did you write this?

The poetry works very well, especially with the image you selected.

Well done. I am really impressed.

Thank you.