There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

[Rivendale]

I’m going to challenge Daniel on his clarification. He thinks it that if someone believes their religion is true, then they have to dismiss all evidence against it as false or yet to be proven false.

This is only true for fundamentalist inflexible religions like Mormonism. If the garden of Eden didn’t exist, most non-fundamentalist Christians don’t have a problem. But if Nephi didn’t exist, Mormonism has a serious problem.

What Daniel really said is that he believes Mormonism is a fundamentalist religion, and can’t throw the historicity of the Book of Mormon under the bus. I agree completely with him. But I don’t sympathize with his personal delusion that because he has a witness of the truth of Mormonism, that must mean that Hebrews built a vast ancient undiscovered civilization in the Americas. It is vastly more likely that his personal witness of the truth of Mormonism is incorrect.

Nelson is trying to make the new Mormonism more christian friendly. Jettisoning Moroni from the temples. Banning the use of Mormon. He can't escape historical truth claims. Not only the garden of Eden. But the tower of babble. A literal Adam and Eve. A literal migration of Israelites to the Americas. Literal gold plates. A working seer stone. No death before the fall. The book of Abraham. And many more. Should any of these claims fall the entire house of cards falls. They are juggling hand grenades every day.

[drumdude]

Yep. Which is why people ask Daniel if any of them are valid. And Dan is forced to say, “if they are, we are screwed. So they can’t be.”

[Rivendale]

Yep. Which is why people ask Daniel if any of them are valid. And Dan is forced to say, “if they are, we are screwed. So they can’t be.”

Every day Dan must stare at a Tumbaga plaque that has the inscription

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

And then lament how Dudgeonmasters and Mythbusters ripped it off.

[drumdude]

It’s just a mountain of hurdles. Which is why the CES letter is so devastating when you see them all laid out together. I know Dan wants people to think they’ve all been dealt with but they haven’t. A couple weaslel-worded paragraphs on FairMormon aren’t enough to stop people seeing the mountain. They fill their bucket with a problem from one side of the mountain, and dump it on the other. They aren’t eliminating problems, they’re just shuffling them around.

[drumdude]

Good afternoon Doctor,

How are you today?

I agree some of the critics twisted your words. I think we should simply ignore the people who always attack you.

Please allow me to ask you some questions because I'm genuinely curious about your views. Are you open to the possibility that the church is not true? why do you believe in the church? and can you please share the spiritual experience that convinced you that God is real?

By the way this is the proper way to respond to Daniel on his blog. It is similar to how you approach the Queen of England or the Pope.

Step 1) acknowledge his PhD
Step 2) ask how he is doing today
Step 3) agree completely with his mischaracterization of a certain unnamed forum
Step 4) ask meekly your question, reassuring DCP that you are not a secret anti-Mormon

He missed step 5) bow fully, take 3 steps backwards, and quickly and silently walk out of the comment section.

[doubtingthomas]

By the way this is the proper way to respond to Daniel on his blog. It is similar to how you approach the Queen of England or the Pope.

Step 1) acknowledge his PhD
Step 2) ask how he is doing today
Step 3) agree completely with his mischaracterization of a certain unnamed forum
Step 4) ask meekly your question, reassuring DCP that you are not a secret anti-Mormon

He missed step 5) bow fully, take 3 steps backwards, and quickly and silently walk out of the comment section.

In court, you always address a judge as "Your honor". If you disagree with the judge you say "with all due respect your Honor". But inside your head, you can think the judge is a complete moron.

[doubtingthomas]

Step 3) agree completely with his mischaracterization of a certain unnamed forum

It's just a psychological trick. In a debate, you should try to agree with your opponent as much as you can.

[drumdude]

How do these commenters even know what is being said here if Daniel doesn’t link to the forum?

[doubtingthomas]

How do these commenters even know what is being said here if Daniel doesn’t link to the forum?

Good question.

[doubtingthomas]

By the way this is the proper way to respond to Daniel on his blog. It is similar to how you approach the Queen of England or the Pope.

And for nothing, because Dan P won't answer the questions.

I bet the comment will mysteriously disappear.