DCP Admits to "LDS Academic Embarrassment"

Post by **_beastie** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:22 am

I'm just waiting for mathematical proof that religion is false.

And I'm waiting for mathematical proof that there is no invisible flying spaghetti monster.

Post by **_evolving** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:30 am

LifeOnaPlate wrote:I'm just waiting for mathematical proof that religion is false.

how bout -- 1+1=2

Joseph claimed he translate Egyptian hieroglyphs + it has been proven that he could not do it = the church is at least not what it claims to be..

Post by **_harmony** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:30 am

charity wrote: You have no case. There is no place in secular academia or any other academia where bearing testimony of the Book of Mormon has a place. It isn't a matter of embarrassment. Let any secular academic attend a sacrament meeting and he will hear the testimony bearing. That is the place for testimonies.

Actually, the Book of Mormon is studied fairly extensively for what it is: a 19th century document. What does not take place is that the Book of Mormon be studied as the document it claims to be: a product of Mesoamerica in ancient times. Scholars are going to study it as what it is, not what it is not. And no amount of testimony bearing is going to change that.

Post by **_LifeOnaPlate** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:33 am

Runtu wrote:
LifeOnaPlate wrote:I think my real point is, aside from any argument, you are unhealthily obsessed with the LDS Church.

Why shouldn't church members be "obsessed" with their own church? Isn't that supposed to be a good thing?

Ah, Mr. Scratch is the model Mormon.

Post by **_LifeOnaPlate** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:34 am

evolving wrote:
LifeOnaPlate wrote:I'm just waiting for mathematical proof that religion is false.

how bout -- 1+1=2

Joseph claimed he translate Egyptian hieroglyphs + it has been proven that he could not do it = the church is at least not what it claims to be..

Ok..... that's not math, though.

beastie wrote:
I'm just waiting for mathematical proof that religion is false.

And I'm waiting for mathematical proof that there is no invisible flying spaghetti monster.

LCD.

Post by **_Runtu** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:36 am

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Ah, Mr. Scratch is the model Mormon.

But you don't really know that, do you? You have no idea of his level of activity or belief in the church, do you?

Post by **_beastie** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:40 am

LCD.

I have no idea what this means.

I do know you are doing your best to divert the conversation from the original topic.

Post by **_LifeOnaPlate** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:41 am

I'm so caught, beastie! You know, for a bunch of anti-Mormons, you guys sure bear your testimonies a lot.

Post by **_barrelomonkeys** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:43 am

LifeOnaPlate wrote:I'm so caught, beastie! You know, for a bunch of anti-Mormons, you guys sure bear your testimonies a lot.

Urgh. Why are they anti-LDS? And why do you assume everyone that participates on this thread is no longer a member?

I certainly don't make those assumptions. Why do you?

Post by **_barrelomonkeys** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:44 am

beastie wrote:
LCD.

I have no idea what this means.

I do know you are doing your best to divert the conversation from the original topic.

Beastie, someone could shoot Bond a PM and have the posts, including this one, that aren't on topic moved.