Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Shulem »

Gadianton wrote:
Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:03 pm
I'd say that's a slam dunk, and so far uncontested.

Just wait till Fat Dan gets the word. He'll be sorry.

Mounting Evidence for the Book of Mormon By Daniel C. Peterson 2009
Dan wrote:The appearance of two men named Alma in the Book of Mormon has occasioned much comment. Critics observe that Alma is a woman’s name and Latin rather than Hebrew. They are correct. If Joseph Smith knew the name Alma at all in the early 19th century, he would have known it as a woman’s name. Recent documentary finds demonstrate, however, that Alma also occurs as a Semitic masculine personal name in the ancient Near East—just as it does in the Book of Mormon.
You're wrong, Dan. Now, admit it.

Blah, blah, blah, Dan. I give your paper an F grade because you're a flunky school teacher!

:lol:
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Dr Moore »

Dear Everybody Wang Chung,

FAIR appears to play a shell game with factual statements to anticipate and slip past your accusation, don't they? I mean, in actuality, nothing in the FAIR entry is falsifiable at all.

Let me explain.

Their presentation has 3 independent parts:
(1) Joseph WOULD have known about Alma as a female Latinate name
(2) Joseph COULD NOT possibly have known about Alma as an ancient Hebrew name
(3) Alma as a man's name has brought considerable entertainment for critics

Importantly, FAIR says absolutely nothing about whether Joseph WOULD or WOULD NOT have known about Alma as a man's name. Obviously, that is a critical tidbit to neglect, and we can be 100% certain that the neglect was purposeful.

However, not one of parts (1), (2) or (3) are untruthful or independently falsifiable, are they? FAIR's argument here creates a sort of non-overlapping VENN diagram -- all "truthful" information without admitting one pixel of space for the obvious alternative explanation.

It is dishonest, to be sure. Crafty and dishonest. Typical Mopologetic fare. I bet the editing process on that entry underwent a careful review. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. They should remove the entry or else provide the additional evidence that Alma as a man's name was not odd whatsoever in the 1820s.

And you're right to call them out for it. Not because the entry itself is falsifiable, but for its incredible, intentional deception.
Last edited by Dr Moore on Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Philo Sofee »

Excellent insight Dr. Moore! And to them it is deniable if they are ever called on it, so they can continue being deceptive and have no guilt in themselves over it. Very clever indeed! And all the while imagine it is true!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Jeff Lindsay

Post by Shulem »

Jeff Lindsay Cracked Planet
Jeff wrote:The discovery of “Alma” as an authentic Jewish male name from around the time of Lehi ought to give the critics food for thought, but this find is generally ignored or casually dismissed.
Jeff, you're UNINFORMED. Joseph Smith knew the name Alma as a male name from people in his very locality. The name Alma is not evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.
Jeff wrote:Alma proves to not only be a genuine Semitic name, but is a name of an Hebraic man.
There are lots of Semitic names in the Book of Mormon that Smith simply borrowed from the Bible. With regards to the name Alma it was simply another borrowing on his account. Men in his time and locality were named, Alma.
Jeff wrote:Finding the male name Alma in a record about descendants early Hebrews now must be viewed not as a reason for mocking the Book of Mormon, but as a reason to take it seriously.
Find a king's name in Facsimile No. 3 and you will color me impressed but Alma in the Book of Mormon does nothing for me.
Jeff wrote:Alma, like Nahom, is an example of a name that not only makes sense in light of its Hebrew meaning, but now comes with archaeological evidence to add to its plausibility as a legitimate ancient name.
Ha! Archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon is nonexistent. Archaeological evidence is based in what's found in the dirt not in Smith's vocabulary.

What an idiot.
Last edited by Shulem on Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Shulem »

Mormon apologists are deceptive and are actively spreading false information:
WIKIPEDIA wrote:Alma the Elder
At the time Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon, Alma was known only as a woman's name. Recent historical research indicates it may have been a masculine name among Jewish people around 600 B.C., which is the time Lehi left Jerusalem according to the Book of Mormon.

The gross error above needs to be corrected and the article should be edited, STAT!
.
.
.
.
.


PS. THE REFERENCE ABOVE HAS NOT YET BEEN EDITED. THE M-O-R-M-O-N DEPECPTION CONTINUES. (12/31/2010)
Last edited by Shulem on Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Kishkumen »

Yeah, that’s pretty shameless of them, Shulem.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Shulem »

Kishkumen wrote:
Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:54 am
Yeah, that’s pretty shameless of them, Shulem.

It is shameless. But now that the matter has been positively resolved in favor of the critics, the apologists should step forward and correct the record. But will they? I doubt it. They haven't corrected Smith's errors regarding Facsimile No. 3, so maybe they will try and come up with a wild and crazy idea to defend Alma as if it's a miracle or, archeological proof to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

I hope Everybody Wang Chung crams this thread down Daniel Peterson's throat with his little finger, just like Joe Smith loved.
Last edited by Shulem on Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Shulem »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:49 pm
To preempt the potential appeal to the Bar Kochba, here is Symmachus' thread where he so generously shared his knowledge of orthography and phonology:

http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=49737

So, the name Alma given to a man in Roman times is suppose to prove that Lehi in 600 BC did the same?

I don't think so. Show me proof!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Shulem »


Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 4 (2013


This apologetic drivel ends on this note:
Stephen D. Ricks wrote:The name Alma contains a subtle play on words that Joseph Smith would most likely not have understood given the state of his understanding of ancient Hebrew at that time. All of this, in turn, obliges the reader to decide whether Joseph Smith was an unsophisticated hayseed who just happened to get these names right, or a divinely inspired translator.
Or rather, how about Smith incorporated the name "Alma" into male Book of Mormon heroes simply because guys he knew were named Alma and it seemed like a good idea at the time he wrote his novel?

There is nothing magical about the name Alma being in the Book of Mormon and it does nothing to prop up Smith's ability to understand Hebrew or translate Egyptian into English.

It's all smoke and mirrors, folks. The apologists are playing a fast one, a simple trick, but instead of using sleight of hand they are using sleight of name.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Top 10 Falsifiable FAIRMORMON Claims

Post by Kishkumen »

Dr Moore wrote:
Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:55 pm
Dear Everybody Wang Chung,

FAIR appears to play a shell game with factual statements to anticipate and slip past your accusation, don't they? I mean, in actuality, nothing in the FAIR entry is falsifiable at all.

Let me explain.

Their presentation has 3 independent parts:
(1) Joseph WOULD have known about Alma as a female Latinate name
(2) Joseph COULD NOT possibly have known about Alma as an ancient Hebrew name
(3) Alma as a man's name has brought considerable entertainment for critics

Importantly, FAIR says absolutely nothing about whether Joseph WOULD or WOULD NOT have known about Alma as a man's name. Obviously, that is a critical tidbit to neglect, and we can be 100% certain that the neglect was purposeful.

However, not one of parts (1), (2) or (3) are untruthful or independently falsifiable, are they? FAIR's argument here creates a sort of non-overlapping VENN diagram -- all "truthful" information without admitting one pixel of space for the obvious alternative explanation.

It is dishonest, to be sure. Crafty and dishonest. Typical Mopologetic fare. I bet the editing process on that entry underwent a careful review. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. They should remove the entry or else provide the additional evidence that Alma as a man's name was not odd whatsoever in the 1820s.

And you're right to call them out for it. Not because the entry itself is falsifiable, but for its incredible, intentional deception.
Excellent work, Dr. Moore. You have a real handle on the Mopologetic sophistry at work here. What bothers me is that they *know* this is misleading, and, indeed, it is designed to be so. If my supposed evidence turns out to be negligible, or, honestly, of no worth at all, I would hope that no one finds me engaging in such sophistry. One should admit with integrity that the case did not pan out or at least quietly abandon the argument.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Post Reply