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

[_mentalgymnast]

MG wrote:

For me, it's a rational decision...when all is said and done...to believe that God would deliver an artifact (something we can actually hold in our hands) in our day to testify that Jesus is the Savior/redeemer of mankind.

What is this artifact that you are referencing here? I would like to see it and hold it in my hands.

You have. It's called the Book of Mormon/Another Testament of Jesus Christ.

Regards,
MG

So if I wrote a "Book of Rick/another testament of the flying spaghetti Monster"...and you read it and felt good, does that make it true?

Can't you think of something original other than the same ol' "flying spaghetti Monster" thingie? I remember back in the days of the mormon-l list there were those that used the same phrase. Where in the world did it originate for having been used over and over again? Kinda weird.

You write it. Then make the claims for what it is. We'll read it. Let's see if you can start a new religious institution/movement with the claims of "the one and only", and make it stick for millions of people.

Regards,
MG

Been done. It's called Roman Catholicism...and a few more than 12 million have "stuck." Does that make it true?

To a point, yes. I think Catholicism was meant to "stick". Constantine was called/forordained to do what he did.

Now, your turn!

Regards,
MG

[_BishopRic]

MG wrote:

For me, it's a rational decision...when all is said and done...to believe that God would deliver an artifact (something we can actually hold in our hands) in our day to testify that Jesus is the Savior/redeemer of mankind.

What is this artifact that you are referencing here? I would like to see it and hold it in my hands.

You have. It's called the Book of Mormon/Another Testament of Jesus Christ.

Regards,
MG

So if I wrote a "Book of Rick/another testament of the flying spaghetti Monster"...and you read it and felt good, does that make it true?

Can't you think of something original other than the same ol' "flying spaghetti Monster" thingie? I remember back in the days of the mormon-l list there were those that used the same phrase. Where in the world did it originate for having been used over and over again? Kinda weird.

You write it. Then make the claims for what it is. We'll read it. Let's see if you can start a new religious institution/movement with the claims of "the one and only", and make it stick for millions of people.

Regards,
MG

Been done. It's called Roman Catholicism...and a few more than 12 million have "stuck." Does that make it true?

To a point, yes. I think Catholicism was meant to "stick". Constantine was called/forordained to do what he did.

Now, your turn!

Regards,
MG

No, you missed the point. Many throughout history have claimed to be God's mouthpiece. Their words are written, they have recruited many followers, and they have claimed to have Gods' one true path. Since they contradict each other, logic doesn't allow each to be true. Point is, none of the things you listed prove Mormonism or the Book of Mormon to be "true," or would even be compelling to the reasonable thinker.

[_charity]

What would constitute a killer blow to the Book of Mormon for you? Can you think of any particular way that might come about?

I think she has answered your question, Jersey Girl. There is nothing. She thinks (if not states), I believe, I believe, I believe?

[/quote]

Wrong. I know, I know, I know.

Blind faith or belief is blind. No rational considerations are relevant. No evidence is persuasive. An Islamic fundamentalist ready to die in a suicide attack on others cannot be persuaded that his suicide and the killing of innocent people is wrong, in vain, or without justification.

Your attempt to make LDS comparable to Islamic fundamentalists is sick and shows that you can't argue on a civil basis.

While I would be skeptical that charity would participate in anything like that, charity appears to be equally irrational and no evidence, no rational consideration, nothing could be a “killer blow” as you state.

JAK

And when you can't win an argument in civil debate, try to destroy your opponent personally. You stepped in it.

[_mentalgymnast]

MG wrote:

For me, it's a rational decision...when all is said and done...to believe that God would deliver an artifact (something we can actually hold in our hands) in our day to testify that Jesus is the Savior/redeemer of mankind.

What is this artifact that you are referencing here? I would like to see it and hold it in my hands.

You have. It's called the Book of Mormon/Another Testament of Jesus Christ.

Regards,
MG

So if I wrote a "Book of Rick/another testament of the flying spaghetti Monster"...and you read it and felt good, does that make it true?

Can't you think of something original other than the same ol' "flying spaghetti Monster" thingie? I remember back in the days of the mormon-l list there were those that used the same phrase. Where in the world did it originate for having been used over and over again? Kinda weird.

You write it. Then make the claims for what it is. We'll read it. Let's see if you can start a new religious institution/movement with the claims of "the one and only", and make it stick for millions of people.

Regards,
MG

Been done. It's called Roman Catholicism...and a few more than 12 million have "stuck." Does that make it true?

To a point, yes. I think Catholicism was meant to "stick". Constantine was called/forordained to do what he did.

Now, your turn!

Regards,
MG

No, you missed the point. Many throughout history have claimed to be God's mouthpiece.

To the point. Many throughout history have made claims...and have been correct in their claims. Up to a point. Joseph Smith said that revelation/inspiration comes from God, self, or satan. It is up to us to try and differentiate where revelation claims are coming from. And if it is possible that the revelation/inspiration is from God, then what is the meaning/scope of the purported revelation/inspiration.

Constantine was instrumental in creating an institution which provided Christian indoctrination/faith (up to a point) to large masses of humanity.

Their words are written, they have recruited many followers, and they have claimed to have Gods' one true path. Since they contradict each other, logic doesn't allow each to be true.

Much of what is taught by various world religions doesn't contradict the other when it comes to core values/morals. God speaks to groups of individuals according to their understandings. The Book of Mormon teaches this quite clearly.

Point is, none of the things you listed prove Mormonism or the Book of Mormon to be "true," or would even be compelling to the reasonable thinker.

And that is a blanket/all inclusive statement if I've ever heard one!

Now, back to your artifact. You're going to have to pick something more ingenious than the "flying spaghetti Monster" as your theme. That one's not going to fly. Try and out do Joseph Smith in what you choose as the source material of your so called spiritual writings. Gold plates are out. Some other crazy guy came up with that hoax, right? After all, we know that people in ancient times didn't use plates to keep records.

Come up with something really novel/unique.

Joseph Smith did.

Best wishes,
MG

[_Jersey Girl]

What would constitute a killer blow to the Book of Mormon for you? Can you think of any particular way that might come about?

I think she has answered your question, Jersey Girl. There is nothing. She thinks (if not states), I believe, I believe, I believe?

Wrong. I know, I know, I know.

Blind faith or belief is blind. No rational considerations are relevant. No evidence is persuasive. An Islamic fundamentalist ready to die in a suicide attack on others cannot be persuaded that his suicide and the killing of innocent people is wrong, in vain, or without justification.

Your attempt to make LDS comparable to Islamic fundamentalists is sick and shows that you can't argue on a civil basis.

While I would be skeptical that charity would participate in anything like that, charity appears to be equally irrational and no evidence, no rational consideration, nothing could be a “killer blow” as you state.

JAK

And when you can't win an argument in civil debate, try to destroy your opponent personally. You stepped in it.[/quote]

Jersey Girl:
I'd like to see you respond to the points JAK raised without the personal attack, charity. Would you mind?

[_The Nehor]

I repeat, Charity, you are delusional. I would feel comfortable offering this line of argument as corroborating proof.

Go on waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting . . . ..

People who don't know shouldn't use term they don't understand. A delusion is a "false belief." You have to be able to PROVE that my belief is false. You can't provide that proof. All you can offer up is your belief.

Entirely incorrect, charity.

If you, you claim something, it is YOU who has the burden of proof for the claim. No one else has any responsibility in the face of a claim unsupported by objective, verifiable evidence.

You make claims then attempt to shift the burden of proof to someone who challenges you for evidence for your claims.

If not “delusional,” you are irrational.

No one has any responsibility to prove your beliefs are false. It is YOU who have the responsibility to prove that they are sound.

You appear to present nothing other than your claims.

It's a deeply flawed position.

JAK

Jak!!! How you been? You are assuming Charity needs a consensus of popular opinion in order to have reached a conclusion. The conclusions of JAK should be treated with the greatest skepticism as when knowledge increases we can conclude that there is no evidence proving that JAK in fact exists and is not a head of cabbage.

JAK, if God particularly cared about the whole world having definitive proof he existed he could do it. He doesn't. This means that those people who rely on scientific consensus and other's searching will never find him. It would do not good if they could. It's a path all must walk on their own and God seems to like it that way. So no, you won't find God that way. You have to find him like everyone else did. Or not. Your choice.

[_The Nehor]

While I would be skeptical that charity would participate in anything like that, charity appears to be equally irrational and no evidence, no rational consideration, nothing could be a “killer blow” as you state.

This sure brings back memories. Remember when you called me irrational and accused me of being mentally defective. I countered that I have never been diagnosed with any mental infirmity nor was I ever on any medication for such a condition and requested like confirmation from you. You never answered and disappeared from the thread. Still curious ;)

[_Mercury]

There is nothing more "flimsy" than that offered by Mormons that a feeling proves historical truth.

I don't know of any Mormon that offers a "feeling" to prove a historical truth.

BS. You do it every frigging day! You have done so nummerous times in this thread. You are delusional.

[_The Nehor]

There is nothing more "flimsy" than that offered by Mormons that a feeling proves historical truth.

I don't know of any Mormon that offers a "feeling" to prove a historical truth.

BS. You do it every frigging day! You have done so nummerous times in this thread. You are delusional.

When did she say she proved it?

[_BishopRic]

Try and out do Joseph Smith in what you choose as the source material of your so called spiritual writings. Gold plates are out. Some other crazy guy came up with that hoax, right?

Right.

Come up with something really novel/unique.

Joseph Smith did.

Yes he did...not God, but Joe.

He also used his charisma to marry 33 women (while lying to his first), some married to other men. He also claimed to use his power of God to recognize that the Kinderhook plates were ancient records too, when they were actually made to test him.

He bit, and failed the test.

He wrote a new scripture (the Book of Abraham) from a text that he claimed was written by the hand of Abraham. We found it. It's a funeral text -- nothing to do with Abraham.

I could name a few hundred other evidences against Joe's claims...all of which simply show me and many others that he was a fraud, not a "fore-ordained, man of God chosen to restore the one and only true gospel that is required of all people to eventually accept to make it back to God."

If I were to try to be creative like Joe, I'd at least make sure I got rid of all the evidence that shows I made it up! I may not have Joe's charisma, but I'm a bit smarter.

Best wishes,
MG

And to you too.
BR