JAK wrote:Antishock8, This should give you some idea of what you’re dealing with in Charity.
Don’t attempt to confuse her with the facts or requirement for evidence for faith-based conclusions, she is not interested.
You are quite correct, but keep in mind that she will seize on any thing to avoid confrontation of issues and evidence.
After you find my long response to her, read what she said after that as failed refutation.
JAK
Okay, boys have fun playing in your own sandbox.
But JAK, watch out, if you get too logical with antishcok8 and confuse him, he will call you names and throw rocks.
Antishock8, you should know when playing JAK's sandbox, that he won't answer the hard questions. He posted a pro-Mormon website, thinking it was an anti-site, just because when he googled "plagiarism and the Book of Mormon" it came up. He didn't even read it to notice it was actually pro-Mormon.
Have fun boys. I'm going to stay out of your way.
charity,
I'd like to know what you mean by the use of the word "sandbox" in the above. What is it that you intended to convey?
JAK wrote:Antishock8, This should give you some idea of what you’re dealing with in Charity.
Don’t attempt to confuse her with the facts or requirement for evidence for faith-based conclusions, she is not interested.
You are quite correct, but keep in mind that she will seize on any thing to avoid confrontation of issues and evidence.
After you find my long response to her, read what she said after that as failed refutation.
JAK
Okay, boys have fun playing in your own sandbox.
But JAK, watch out, if you get too logical with antishcok8 and confuse him, he will call you names and throw rocks.
Antishock8, you should know when playing JAK's sandbox, that he won't answer the hard questions. He posted a pro-Mormon website, thinking it was an anti-site, just because when he googled "plagiarism and the Book of Mormon" it came up. He didn't even read it to notice it was actually pro-Mormon.
Have fun boys. I'm going to stay out of your way.
charity,
I'd like to know what you mean by the use of the word "sandbox" in the above. What is it that you intended to convey?
Jersey Girl,
Do want a definition of “sandbox” from Charity?
I do think that might be more suited to her abilities. With you, I’ll look forward to the definition.
Sethbag wrote:Abman: I absolutely think that Joseph's copying the KJV reflects negatively on the question of whether the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text actually written by Nephi, Mormon, etc. I think John's argument is a really good one, ie: Nephi claimed to get the Isaiah passages from the Brass Plates, which came from Jerusalem and were based on pre-existing Israelite scripture. But portions of what allegedly came off the brass plates had never actually been written yet at the time the Brass Plates are supposed to have left Jerusalem. This reflects negatively on the truth claims, because in this part, the truth claims are contradicted by fact.
Alright, I grant that would be a good argument. The only problem is that I'm not as convinced as you are that those Isaiah passages hadn't been written yet. I'm sure other apologist who actually understand the implications have commented on why they don't think it destroys the Book of Mormon. As for me, I'm not an expert in that area and I'm not concerned enough to become one.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Who Knows wrote:Well, we're specifically talking about plagiarism, which charity can't seem to accept.
The Book of Mormon uses the KJV Bible, but does not give credit.
Yeah, I do seem to get hung up on what words mean. So when someone uses the word "plagiarism" I think they ought to use it correctly. What a weakness.
Of course, it gets down to a more basic question. Even if Joseph Smith made it up himself, composed the Book of Mormon as a piece of 19th century fiction, there is still a technical question. He never claimed he wrote it.
If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.
Smith making up and/or composing the Book of Mormon.
Smith translating what God wrote.
I'd like to know what you mean by the use of the word "sandbox" in the above. What is it that you intended to convey?
Sandboxes are where children play. When someone displays childish behaviors, such as name calling, insulting, demeaning, then a sandbox seems to be an appropriate environment.
I'd like to know what you mean by the use of the word "sandbox" in the above. What is it that you intended to convey?
Sandboxes are where children play. When someone displays childish behaviors, such as name calling, insulting, demeaning, then a sandbox seems to be an appropriate environment.
Thanks for clarifying. Where has JAK displayed "childish behaviors such as name calling, insulting, demeaning"?
Ya know...I don't think I can stop myself from saying this, or at least I choose not to. I've noticed more than once where you've chosen to insult an adult by using a child analogy to do it. Sandboxes are also where children learn, charity. You appear to characterize children playing as "name calling" "insulting" "demeaning".
Okay, does JAK expect anybody to follow his convoluted response? Egads, my eyes crossed after the first two screens of various colors. And the links are far too general to spend time on. Jeepers - find a point and make it.
[/rant off]
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
skippy the dead wrote:Okay, does JAK expect anybody to follow his convoluted response? Egads, my eyes crossed after the first two screens of various colors. And the links are far too general to spend time on. Jeepers - find a point and make it.
[/rant off]
Given the format on this board, I don't think JAK expects anybody to follow anything much less a detailed discussion, skippy. How would you suggest that we arrange our posts in order to accurately represent the discussion?
asbestosman wrote:Alright, I grant that would be a good argument. The only problem is that I'm not as convinced as you are that those Isaiah passages hadn't been written yet. I'm sure other apologist who actually understand the implications have commented on why they don't think it destroys the Book of Mormon. As for me, I'm not an expert in that area and I'm not concerned enough to become one.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm not really into Old Testament scholarship, and am having to go on things I've read from others. I'm taking John's word that there's some kind of scholarly concensus for those Isaiah passages having been written at a later date. If someone has some evidence or argumentation to refute that, I'm open to hearing it.
ps: "It has to have been written already, and we know this because it was already on the Brass Plates by the time Lehi left Jerusalem" isn't a good argument against John's timeline. ;-)
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:Abman: I absolutely think that Joseph's copying the KJV reflects negatively on the question of whether the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text actually written by Nephi, Mormon, etc. I think John's argument is a really good one, ie: Nephi claimed to get the Isaiah passages from the Brass Plates, which came from Jerusalem and were based on pre-existing Israelite scripture. But portions of what allegedly came off the brass plates had never actually been written yet at the time the Brass Plates are supposed to have left Jerusalem. This reflects negatively on the truth claims, because in this part, the truth claims are contradicted by fact.
Alright, I grant that would be a good argument. The only problem is that I'm not as convinced as you are that those Isaiah passages hadn't been written yet. I'm sure other apologist who actually understand the implications have commented on why they don't think it destroys the Book of Mormon. As for me, I'm not an expert in that area and I'm not concerned enough to become one.
here is the issue and the single author theory - but remember Isaiah 45 lists the name Cyrus, the Persian King, and I believe Isaiah was dead when he came to power and released the rich Hebrews to go back to Judah.