JAK, I started to respond comment by comment, until I saw I was having to repeat myself. All of your arguments demosntrate a terrible lack of critical thinking and skepticism which you demand. You are just handling out the trash found on most anti-Mormon websites.
Well, except for one hilarious exception.
JAK wrote:[color=#A0522D]JAK: Your attempt at truth by assertion fails here. You’re misinformed. The Book of Mormon is largely plagiarism. Read the sources I link for you. I’ll not copy all the material.
You obviously didn't even read your own link, just read the word "plagarism" in a google search, and slipped it into yhour post. If you had read it you would know that the piece by Jeff Lindsay pokes fun at those people who look for work and phrase similarities as evidence of plagiarism. He "proves" in this article that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from "Leaves of Grass" by Walt Whitman. Except for some of those pesky little facts. Whitman was about 10 years old when the Book of Mormon was published. He didn't even start writing "Leaves of Grass" until about 1850, and it wasn't published until 1855.
I think I don't need to address any more of your claims of plagiarism.
This is evasion on your part. I expected it, but did not state that giving you a fair opportunity to respond to the very detailed responses (plural) which I made to you.
So, my lengthy and precise response stands in direct answer and comment to your statements.
I recognize that I posed most difficult issues for one who prefers blind faith to honest intellectual address.
And the best you can do is this. You clearly demonstrate that you don’t think and you fail in any refutation for the many points and documentation which I provided.
Your opening paragraph is disingenuous, Charity.
The fact is that you cannot address my detailed comments.
“Charity & Evidence” stands absent a responsible, thoughtful rejoinder.
This is evasion on your part. I expected it, but did not state that giving you a fair opportunity to respond to the very detailed responses (plural) which I made to you.
So, my lengthy and precise response stands in direct answer and comment to your statements.
I recognize that I posed most difficult issues for one who prefers blind faith to honest intellectual address.
And the best you can do is this. You clearly demonstrate that you don’t think and you fail in any refutation for the many points and documentation which I provided.
The many points and documentations you provided are only old anti-Mormon arguments which have been effectively refuted years ago. Why should I try to re-invent the wheel?
I notice you evaded the Jeff Lindsay link issue. Why?
Yeah...JAK you used a Jeff Lindsay link. Care to respond to charity's question? (Since he's an apologist an all).
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
charity wrote:JAK, I started to respond comment by comment, until I saw I was having to repeat myself. All of your arguments demosntrate a terrible lack of critical thinking and skepticism which you demand. You are just handling out the trash found on most anti-Mormon websites.
Well, except for one hilarious exception.
JAK wrote:[color=#A0522D]JAK: Your attempt at truth by assertion fails here. You’re misinformed. The Book of Mormon is largely plagiarism. Read the sources I link for you. I’ll not copy all the material.
You obviously didn't even read your own link, just read the word "plagarism" in a google search, and slipped it into yhour post. If you had read it you would know that the piece by Jeff Lindsay pokes fun at those people who look for work and phrase similarities as evidence of plagiarism. He "proves" in this article that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from "Leaves of Grass" by Walt Whitman. Except for some of those pesky little facts. Whitman was about 10 years old when the Book of Mormon was published. He didn't even start writing "Leaves of Grass" until about 1850, and it wasn't published until 1855.
I think I don't need to address any more of your claims of plagiarism.
charity wrote:JAK, I started to respond comment by comment, until I saw I was having to repeat myself. All of your arguments demosntrate a terrible lack of critical thinking and skepticism which you demand. You are just handling out the trash found on most anti-Mormon websites.
Well, except for one hilarious exception.
JAK wrote:[color=#A0522D]JAK: Your attempt at truth by assertion fails here. You’re misinformed. The Book of Mormon is largely plagiarism. Read the sources I link for you. I’ll not copy all the material.
You obviously didn't even read your own link, just read the word "plagarism" in a google search, and slipped it into yhour post. If you had read it you would know that the piece by Jeff Lindsay pokes fun at those people who look for work and phrase similarities as evidence of plagiarism. He "proves" in this article that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from "Leaves of Grass" by Walt Whitman. Except for some of those pesky little facts. Whitman was about 10 years old when the Book of Mormon was published. He didn't even start writing "Leaves of Grass" until about 1850, and it wasn't published until 1855.
I think I don't need to address any more of your claims of plagiarism.