The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:25 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:27 pm


I read through this.
Typical MG. You didn't "read through" crap, and that's why you had nothing to say about a well-sourced 24-page document. God, I hate it when Mormons lie about reading.

- Doc
I read it, and one of his concluding statements:
And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's veracity or the actual authenticity of his work.
Regards,
MG
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Chap wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:06 am

There are certainly some very interesting parallels with the Book of Mormon - though I do not think Smith ever issued a threat of the kind Johnson received!
Again, I think we’re dealing with types and shadows and coincidental parallels. The law of averages and chance would seem to dictate this to be so.

And critics accuse Mormons of over doing it with parallelism. 😉

Regards,
MG
Marcus
God
Posts: 5033
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Marcus »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:38 pm
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:25 pm


Typical MG. You didn't "read through" crap, and that's why you had nothing to say about a well-sourced 24-page document. God, I hate it when Mormons lie about reading.

- Doc
I read it, and one of his concluding statements:
And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's veracity or the actual authenticity of his work.
Regards,
MG
:lol:
and here is the context of that single sentence you cherrypicked, emphasizing an entirely different meaning:
It is not necessary to show or even suggest a fledgling prophet contemplating
Macpherson before we can say that once again, we have concrete evidence from
the immediate world of young Joseph Smith displaying additional aspects of the
Restoration - and its subsequent apologetic devices for defense - which were not
so unusual or dependent upon divine inspiration as we once may have believed.

And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point
of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's
veracity or the actual authenticity of his work. The point, instead, is to
demonstrate that many traditional Mormon techniques of defense (whichever
ones may be suggested by the parallels seen here) may not be so relevant or
applicable as some writers have presumed.

Cherrypicking fails again.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8979
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

MG just scrolled down, scanned a bit he thought he could use, posted, and immediately demonstrated that he didn't read the file. And he continues to lie about it!

Unbelievable. Mormons.

:roll:

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Morley
God
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
Location: detail from Alice Neel's 1980 self portrait

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Morley »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:25 pm
Typical MG. You didn't "read through" crap, and that's why you had nothing to say about a well-sourced 24-page document. God, I hate it when Mormons lie about reading.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:38 pm
I read it, and one of his concluding statements:
And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's veracity or the actual authenticity of his work.
MG, that you could paste one of the concluding statements here is all the proof that anyone should need to know that you read the article.

Well done.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:01 pm
MG just scrolled down, scanned a bit he thought he could use, posted, and immediately demonstrated that he didn't read the file. And he continues to lie about it!

Unbelievable. Mormons.

:roll:

- Doc
I think you’re avoiding the fact that the sentence I posted from Grunder’s closing paragraph stands independently from what came before and after. I did read the whole paragraph. I read the whole paper also.


Regards,
MG
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Marcus wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:55 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:38 pm


I read it, and one of his concluding statements:



Regards,
MG
:lol:
and here is the context of that single sentence you cherrypicked, emphasizing an entirely different meaning:
It is not necessary to show or even suggest a fledgling prophet contemplating
Macpherson before we can say that once again, we have concrete evidence from
the immediate world of young Joseph Smith displaying additional aspects of the
Restoration - and its subsequent apologetic devices for defense - which were not
so unusual or dependent upon divine inspiration as we once may have believed.

And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point
of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's
veracity or the actual authenticity of his work. The point, instead, is to
demonstrate that many traditional Mormon techniques of defense (whichever
ones may be suggested by the parallels seen here) may not be so relevant or
applicable as some writers have presumed.

Cherrypicking fails again.
Nope.

Regards,
MG
Marcus
God
Posts: 5033
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Marcus »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:50 pm
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:01 pm
MG just scrolled down, scanned a bit he thought he could use, posted, and immediately demonstrated that he didn't read the file. And he continues to lie about it!

Unbelievable. Mormons.

:roll:

- Doc
I think you’re avoiding the fact that the sentence I posted from Grunder’s closing paragraph stands independently from what came before and after....
no, it clearly doesn't.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Morley wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:04 pm
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:25 pm
Typical MG. You didn't "read through" crap, and that's why you had nothing to say about a well-sourced 24-page document. God, I hate it when Mormons lie about reading.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:38 pm
I read it, and one of his concluding statements:


MG, that you could paste one of the concluding statements here is all the proof that anyone should need to know that you read the article.

Well done.
I’m not going to argue with you in regards to whether or not I spent the time reading Grunder’s link. I’ve already said I did.

And that’s enough.

You are not arguing substance. You’re simply nit picking. Do we need to play that game again?

Regards,
MG
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by MG 2.0 »

Marcus wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:53 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:50 pm


I think you’re avoiding the fact that the sentence I posted from Grunder’s closing paragraph stands independently from what came before and after....
no, it clearly doesn't.
It does.

Regards,
MG
Post Reply