TBM's: Killer blow to the Book of Mormon?

[_truth dancer]

Killer blow?

There is nothing that will convince a true believer that their belief (regardless of belief), is incorrect. Nothing.

So long as the believer holds that to question, doubt, or deny what they believe is true will put them in hell/OD, it is nearly impossible for them to disbelieve.

Again, regardless of belief, true believers can twist, contort, reinterpret, revise ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to keep their "reality," regardless of how ridiculous and nonsensical it may be.

~dancer~

[_beastie]

Once again, time for Eric Hoffer:

“So tenaciously should we cling to the world revealed by the Gospel, that were I to see all the Angels of Heaven coming down to me to tell me something different, not only would I not be tempted to doubt a single syllable, but I would shut my eyes and stop my ears, for they would not deserve to be either seen or heard.” (Luther) To rely on the evidence of the senses and of reason is heresy and treason. It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. What we know as blind faith is sustained by innumerable unbeliefs. The fanatical Japanese in Brazil refused to believe for four years the evidence of Japan’s defeat. The fanatical communist refuses to believe any unfavorable report or evidence about Russia, nor will he be disillusioned by seeing with his own eyes that the cruel misery inside the Soviet promise land.

It is the true believers ability to “shut his eyes and stop his ears” to facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard which is the source of his unequaled fortitude and constancy. He cannot be frightened by danger nor disheartened by obstacles nor baffled by contradictions because he denies their existence. Strength of faith, as Bergson pointed out, manifests itself not in moving mountains but in not seeing mountains to move. And it is the certitude of his infallible doctrine that renders the true believer impervious to the uncertainties, surprises and the unpleasant realities of the world around him.

Thus the effectiveness of a doctrine should not be judged by its profundity, sublimity or the validity of the truths it embodies, but by how thoroughly it insulates the individual from his self and the world as it is. What Pascal said of an effective religion is true of any effective doctrine: it must be “contrary to nature, to common sense, and to pleasure”.

[_truth dancer]

True believers (of any religion), are of a mindset that their righteousness is proven by the very fact that they, regardless of evidence, will not deny what they believe. The more evidence their belief is unfounded the more righteous they feel when they do not deny.

So, not only do they have enormous fear that if they deny their belief they will go to hell (or be cast out or experience some other horrible consequence), they also feel a sense of righteousness, superiority, and grandiosity when they hold to their beliefs in spite of all evidence.

~dancer~

[_LCD2YOU]

Charity feels, and correct me if I'm worng here Charity, that "nobody has shown the 'Book of Abraham' to be false". Is that correct?

Charity doesn't "feel" that nobody has shown the Book of Abraham to be false. Charity makes that statement of fact. What the critics have shown is that the piece of recovered papyri which allegedly came from the papyri once in Joseph Smith's possession is a Book of Breathing. This says nothing about the rest of the papyri. No one in the Church says that the Book of Abraham came for that tiny percentage of the papyri collection.

Whether the papyri which were the Book of Abraham are still somewhere and just lost or whether they burned up in the Chicago fire, who knows.

Actually Charity you can only "feel" that the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham are true. There is no evidence to back either up.

So do you have evidence to support the Book of Abraham or Book of Mormon or do you only feelings? As Muslims tell us that it is a "fact that the Koran is true and that Mohammed is the one true Prophet of Allah" do you accept their facts?

I would like to know what you know about the difference between belief, faith, idea, postulate, hypothesis, theory, proof and fact.

[_karl61]

I was watching Hillary, her daughter and Bill Clinton yesterday on T.V. I was watching her waving and smiling to friends in the crowd. I thought that this is her surroundings for over a year and she is a movie star for a moment - It is at election night when they stand on the podiem do they start to experience reality. I think that is what LDS people start to feel like when facts start coming in and they find out they are not in Kansas anymore.

[_malkie]

Charity feels, and correct me if I'm worng here Charity, that "nobody has shown the 'Book of Abraham' to be false". Is that correct?

Charity doesn't "feel" that nobody has shown the Book of Abraham to be false. Charity makes that statement of fact. What the critics have shown is that the piece of recovered papyri which allegedly came from the papyri once in Joseph Smith's possession is a Book of Breathing. This says nothing about the rest of the papyri. No one in the Church says that the Book of Abraham came for that tiny percentage of the papyri collection.

Whether the papyri which were the Book of Abraham are still somewhere and just lost or whether they burned up in the Chicago fire, who knows.

Sorry if I'm just dredging up old stuff that has been definitively put to bed, but I was under the impression that we do not need to depend on any papyri - we just need to look at the reproductions/facsimiles of such in the Book of Abraham and compare the accepted modern interpretation with the annotations in the Book of Abraham that accompany each facsimile.

Of course, if I were to go into snarky, sarcastic, cynical mode, I could imagine that an apologist might say that all that is needed is for us to wait long enough, and modern Egyptology will catch up with the genius of Joseph Smith's translation.

[_sunstoned]

Charity feels, and correct me if I'm worng here Charity, that "nobody has shown the 'Book of Abraham' to be false". Is that correct?

Charity doesn't "feel" that nobody has shown the Book of Abraham to be false. Charity makes that statement of fact. What the critics have shown is that the piece of recovered papyri which allegedly came from the papyri once in Joseph Smith's possession is a Book of Breathing. This says nothing about the rest of the papyri. No one in the Church says that the Book of Abraham came for that tiny percentage of the papyri collection.

Whether the papyri which were the Book of Abraham are still somewhere and just lost or whether they burned up in the Chicago fire, who knows.

Sorry if I'm just dredging up old stuff that has been definitively put to bed, but I was under the impression that we do not need to depend on any papyri - we just need to look at the reproductions/facsimiles of such in the Book of Abraham and compare the accepted modern interpretation with the annotations in the Book of Abraham that accompany each facsimile.

Of course, if I were to go into snarky, sarcastic, cynical mode, I could imagine that an apologist might say that all that is needed is for us to wait long enough, and modern Egyptology will catch up with the genius of Joseph Smith's translation.

This is my way of thinking also. We have the papyri with facsimiles that are illustrated in the Book of Abraham. They do not match the "translation" that Joseph Smith said he made. They do not come close to a real translation. This is real evidence. This is enough to prove Joseph Smith lied about his translation. To me this is the killer blow to Joseph Smith credibility and honestly.

[_mentalgymnast]

In another thread, charity, described various reasons why she thinks the critic's are not "winning", I suppose you could say, and she wrote about not seeing any "killer blows" to the Book of Abraham. I posed this question to charity in the existing thread but now I'm curious.

What would TBM's consider to be a "killer blow" to the Book of Mormon?

To find out that it's false.

Regards,
MG

What would you consider evidence showing that the Book of Mormon is false?

Something other than what I've seen so far.

Regards,
MG

[_LCD2YOU]

In another thread, charity, described various reasons why she thinks the critic's are not "winning", I suppose you could say, and she wrote about not seeing any "killer blows" to the Book of Abraham. I posed this question to charity in the existing thread but now I'm curious.

What would TBM's consider to be a "killer blow" to the Book of Mormon?

To find out that it's false.

Regards,
MG

What would you consider evidence showing that the Book of Mormon is false?

Something other than what I've seen so far.

Regards,
MG

Okay, what to you makes you feel it is right? After all, there is no evidence that anything in the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham ever existed.

[_mentalgymnast]

In another thread, charity, described various reasons why she thinks the critic's are not "winning", I suppose you could say, and she wrote about not seeing any "killer blows" to the Book of Abraham. I posed this question to charity in the existing thread but now I'm curious.

What would TBM's consider to be a "killer blow" to the Book of Mormon?

To find out that it's false.

Regards,
MG

What would you consider evidence showing that the Book of Mormon is false?

Something other than what I've seen so far.

Regards,
MG

Okay, what to you makes you feel it is right? After all, there is no evidence that anything in the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham ever existed.

Joseph Smith refers to the Book of Mormon being the keystone of the LDS religion. It is through the Book of Mormon that many have come to Christ and his gospel. There is a spirit that accompanies the reading of this book which brings a person closer to God and Christ as they apply Moroni's promise. I had the opportunity of listening to the testimony of a recent convert this last Sunday here in our home. She had been a non-believer in the divinity of Christ before picking up and reading the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon is the great sifter between those that seek Christ and his gospel and those that are happy to live/act as the scoffers residing in the great and spacious building, mocking those that seek after the tree of life.

As you've read the Book of Mormon over the years (assuming that you have), what spirit do you perceive/acknowledge coming from the reading of this book? Has it brought you closer to Christ and helped you understand his mission as Savior/redeemer of mankind?

Or did you reject that message?

Apparently so.

Regards,
MG