Repent, thou blind liars!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Repent, thou blind liars!

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

From MADB:

Cold Steel wrote:Critics of Nostradamas will never see anything in the quatrains he wrote, and those who do will never understand why they won’t. And such also is the case with Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. The main difference is, the things Joseph Smith could not have known does not fall into that category. People who say that the Book of Mormon shows us nothing to convince us of its authenticity are blind, misleading or out-in-out duplicitous—and sometimes a combination of all three.
...
Most honest people can say, well, I can’t explain it, but I don’t believe it. (Sort of like the compelling accounts of people who claim to be reincarnations of historical personalities.) But, again, the archeological evidence and consistencies of the Book of Mormon are unassailable. One may choose not to believe the Book of Mormon even in light of such consistencies, but to deny them is another matter altogether.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 34653&st=0
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Tried the link and was told "could not be had," or something like that... Roger
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Repent, thou blind liars!

Post by _Tarski »

CaliforniaKid wrote:From MADB:

Cold Steel wrote:Critics of Nostradamas will never see anything in the quatrains he wrote, and those who do will never understand why they won’t. And such also is the case with Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. The main difference is, the things Joseph Smith could not have known does not fall into that category. People who say that the Book of Mormon shows us nothing to convince us of its authenticity are blind, misleading or out-in-out duplicitous—and sometimes a combination of all three.
...
Most honest people can say, well, I can’t explain it, but I don’t believe it. (Sort of like the compelling accounts of people who claim to be reincarnations of historical personalities.) But, again, the archeological evidence and consistencies of the Book of Mormon are unassailable. One may choose not to believe the Book of Mormon even in light of such consistencies, but to deny them is another matter altogether.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 34653&st=0


It is telling that this "cold steel" guy compares Joseph Smith with Nostradamus. Nostradamus is an obvious fraud.
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

People who assert that the archeological evidence for the Book of Mormon is "unassailable" are speaking from profound ignorance.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

Roger Morrison wrote:Tried the link and was told "could not be had," or something like that... Roger


You have to cut-and-paste it. MADB blocks link-clicks from MDB.

It is telling that this "cold steel" guy compares Joseph Smith with Nostradamus. Nostradamus is an obvious fraud.


I think his point is that they're not the same, because there's little evidence for Nostradamus but there are tons of things Joseph could not have known that you'd have to be blind or a liar to dismiss.
_richardMdBorn
_Emeritus
Posts: 1639
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:05 am

Re: Repent, thou blind liars!

Post by _richardMdBorn »

CaliforniaKid wrote:From MADB:

Cold Steel wrote:Critics of Nostradamas will never see anything in the quatrains he wrote, and those who do will never understand why they won’t. And such also is the case with Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. The main difference is, the things Joseph Smith could not have known does not fall into that category. People who say that the Book of Mormon shows us nothing to convince us of its authenticity are blind, misleading or out-in-out duplicitous—and sometimes a combination of all three.
...
Most honest people can say, well, I can’t explain it, but I don’t believe it. (Sort of like the compelling accounts of people who claim to be reincarnations of historical personalities.) But, again, the archeological evidence and consistencies of the Book of Mormon are unassailable. One may choose not to believe the Book of Mormon even in light of such consistencies, but to deny them is another matter altogether.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 34653&st=0
Cold Steel continues to repeat wrong statements about the Millerites after I refuted them, so why am I not surprised.
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Post by _The Dude »

That Cold Steel fella is a real piece of work. He's what you might call a "fire and brimstone" Mormon after the pattern of Brigham Young. He'd make a good Danite.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Post Reply