Page 14 of 17
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:01 pm
by MG 2.0
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:27 pm
I read through this. Interesting stuff. It seems to me that as we gaze back through historical literature, fabricated and/or real, that we’re going to observe types and shadows bumping up against each other with intermixing elements that can be used to show relationships which may or may not show actual correlation/connection.
And again we come back to the issue of just how much would Joseph have bumped up against all this stuff that critics say he did.
Regards,
MG
*bump
This is the point I was making which you are attempting to bury.
I’m afraid we’re heading into a derail and potential he said, she said. Other people reading this thread deserve more than this.
Regards,
MG
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:02 pm
by MG 2.0
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:47 pm
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
*bump
and this…
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:03 pm
by MG 2.0
I’ll back out for now to let others take the thread in the direction you might like to take it.
Regards,
MG
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:06 pm
by Morley
Morley wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:04 pm
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 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:55 pm
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?
You misunderstand me. I'm not commenting on your veracity. I'm laughing at your methodology. My point is that there are better ways to prove you read a piece than pasting a quote from the piece. Do you disagree?
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:06 pm
by Dr Moore
I see MG found another human to pig wrestle in the mud with. Sigh. What a waste of thread pages. Every time.
It’s like, hey this grass is green.
MG jumps in to troll, well that’s a biased statement! The grass is red according to the view through this color filter, and also when it’s on fire, and sometimes in the early morning when the sunrise hits just right. And it’s red in my mind when I pray about the grass. You say green and others say red. To each their own. Green if you’ve decided to stick with green. Red if you have an open mind to truth beyond the limits of science. Regards, MG
Others: it’s for sure green. Here’s the spectroscopy report. There is not a single peer reviewed scientist who agrees it isn’t green, or even might not be green. The grass is green.
MG: can’t believe this sucker took the bait. Yeah those spectroscopy thingsmajiggers are made by who again? Non believers. They’re biased too. One guy put a red color filter on his and it showed red grass, so that’s a study and you have your studies. To each their own but only someone in an echo chamber would insist the grass is green. It’s red, to me, and that’s a choice even though once I considered it could be green. Also, here’s a piece written by someone I consider credible, showing how the grass is red under all sorts of conditions, but it’s not his fault no journals want to run a story about red grass. Anyhoo, you do your thing and I’ll do mine, but just in case you wondered, there’s a whole world out here for those of us who see red grass. Also, I did read those studies and there was one place where the guy wrote “…grass is red…” so hah! Regards, MG
And around and around. MG doesn’t give two craps about data, methodology or logic. All he wants is to get people mad. #ignorethetroll
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:28 pm
by Morley
Moore, you're absolutely right. I'll step back.
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:02 pm
by Chap
Dr Moore wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:06 pm
And around and around. MG doesn’t give two craps about data, methodology or logic. All he wants is to get people mad. #ignorethetroll
Nicely put.
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:25 pm
by Marcus
That was an excellent piece of channeling, Dr. Moore, and you are right. A good reminder, thank you.
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:58 pm
by MG 2.0
Morley wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:06 pm
Morley wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:04 pm
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 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:55 pm
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?
You misunderstand me. I'm not commenting on your veracity. I'm laughing at your methodology. My point is that there are better ways to prove you read a piece than pasting a quote from the piece. Do you disagree?
No. But the thing is, I don’t need to prove anything. My word is good enough.
Regards,
MG
Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:59 pm
by MG 2.0
Dr Moore wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:06 pm
I see MG found another human to pig wrestle in the mud with. Sigh. What a waste of thread pages. Every time.
It’s like, hey this grass is green.
MG jumps in to troll, well that’s a biased statement! The grass is red according to the view through this color filter, and also when it’s on fire, and sometimes in the early morning when the sunrise hits just right. And it’s red in my mind when I pray about the grass. You say green and others say red. To each their own. Green if you’ve decided to stick with green. Red if you have an open mind to truth beyond the limits of science. Regards, MG
Others: it’s for sure green. Here’s the spectroscopy report. There is not a single peer reviewed scientist who agrees it isn’t green, or even might not be green. The grass is green.
MG:
can’t believe this sucker took the bait. Yeah those spectroscopy thingsmajiggers are made by who again? Non believers. They’re biased too. One guy put a red color filter on his and it showed red grass, so that’s a study and you have your studies. To each their own but only someone in an echo chamber would insist the grass is green. It’s red, to me, and that’s a choice even though once I considered it could be green. Also, here’s a piece written by someone I consider credible, showing how the grass is red under all sorts of conditions, but it’s not his fault no journals want to run a story about red grass. Anyhoo, you do your thing and I’ll do mine, but just in case you wondered, there’s a whole world out here for those of us who see red grass. Also, I did read those studies and there was one place where the guy wrote “…grass is red…” so hah! Regards, MG
And around and around. MG doesn’t give two craps about data, methodology or logic. All he wants is to get people mad. #ignorethetroll
To those that have eyes to see…
Regards,
MG
