grindael wrote:grindael wrote:...What stuns me though, is how willing you are to discredit your own chosen "authorities" as meaningless men who don't have any authority to do such things...
hagoth7 wrote:If that is what you think I am doing, you have drastically misinterpreted me.
Your words speak for themselves.
grindael wrote:I guess your own interpretations are so important to you, that you will ignore those that had the real authority to declare doctrine. ...You are wrong, and they are right. You lost this argument...
hagoth7 wrote:Lost? Why do you frequently refer to a discussion as an "argument"? Do you ever actually sit down and have a respectful "discussion" with someone who might have a different viewpoint than you? Or is everything necessarily confrontational and adversarial?
You obviously don't understand the meaning of words. What we are having is a discussion. There is a difference between having an argument and PRESENTING an argument. Look it up. Your derogatory words towards me at the very outset show where you are coming from.
grindael wrote:...unless you want to claim that these men are good for nothing but opinions...
hagoth7 wrote:No. That is not at all what I have claimed.
Please note the context of the sentence.
I'll take that as a victory also. Thanks.
hagoth7 wrote:Claim whatever you wish. You are misinterpreting me to a tremendous degree.
No, I'm not, but of course you would think so.
Also, the Books declare this publishing stamp: THE DESERET NEWS...This means, like Talmage's "Articles of Faith" and "Jesus the Christ" (which had the same stamp) they were published under the auspices of the Church itself.
hagoth7 wrote: So everything I read in the Deseret News is now also official church doctrine? Good to know.

This is so silly that I can't believe you made this comment. You obviously know nothing about how the Church published at the turn of the Century. I suggest (again) that you study more before making such foolish comments.
grindael wrote:The Nephites became extinct, ALL OF THEM, everywhere...
hagoth7 wrote:Believe that if you wish. (But then again, you don't believe they ever existed anywhere.)
It is not what I believe, but what your "authorities" have taught. Deal with it. I've provided the authoritative doctrine, all you have done is give your non authoritative opinion. I'll let the readers decide.
hagoth7 wrote:As to whether any Nephites survived elsewhere, I am quite free to believe as I wish, being that what I believe is derived from promises in scripture. And you are quite free to disagree, while doubting those same scriptures. Again, what I believe is certainly not official church doctrine. But your assertion that Tironian is somehow not credible ancient evidence for Nephites is merely that, a personal opinion. (As if any any amount of Nephite evidence would be deemed credible by some in this life.) I'll stick with my beliefs, thank you anyway.
You are just repeating yourself. It's already been shown that what you claim about Tironian is not credible evidence for Nephites, and that they were deemed by Mormon "authorities" as totally extinct, and that "white and delightsome" is about SKIN COLOR and therefore racist, but again, go ahead and believe that and good luck selling it to any but Mormon Apologists and those ignorant of the facts or in denial mode.
grindael wrote:You can sure believe whatever you want, but it is not derived by promises in Mormon scripture,
hagoth7 wrote:But it is. By several.
No, it isn't, as I've shown with evidence.
...as your own authorites have debunked your pet theory.
hagoth7 wrote:Actually, they have not even commented on my theory. And I don't know if they ever will.
Yes, they have by their words. In the Ensign Article I quoted they were addressing that very question if any Nephites had survived. But then, I get it that you won't acknowledge any of it and would rather stay ignorant.
grindael wrote:...you threw Roberts, an apostle, church historian (there were two actually and a fellow President of the Council of Seventy) and the First Presidency under the bus....
hagoth7 wrote:No actually. You simply choose to interpret it that way.