Jason Bourne wrote:No. THere are many undisputed fact. Joseph Smith was shot in June 27, 1844. This is an undisputed historical fact.
I contend it was the 26th, and that the journal entries weren't written AFTER the fact. It's a well established notion that 19th record keepers were notoriously lazy and sometimes drunk when using the pen and quill. And anti-Mormon. Plaid.
Jason Bourne wrote:No. THere are many undisputed fact. Joseph Smith was shot in June 27, 1844. This is an undisputed historical fact.
Really? I thought he fell out of a window and died. Hmm, church videos and lessons really are not clear but the Mormons be damned if they don't have motab belting out "Oh Poor wayfaring man of grief".
I think you know what I was getting at when isolating Mormonism, Jason. To a TBM it is an undisputed fact that joe saw god and Christ while he was praying in the grove.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
LifeOnaPlate wrote:Generally speaking there are historical events we can feel confident in agreeing upon. For example, we may agree that GWB won the Presidential election the past two terms. (Some may disagree with even that, however.)
He did not win. He was appointed by the Supreme Court.
He is the leader You deserved.
Unfortunately, we - in Hungary - have another type of unworthy one.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco - To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
LifeOnaPlate wrote:Is there such a thing as "undisputed historical facts"?
Generally speaking there are historical events we can feel confident in agreeing upon. For example, we may agree that GWB won the Presidential election the past two terms. (Some may disagree with even that, however.)
How can we know undisputed historical fact? Is there such a thing as historical objectivity? Why or why not?
It is a historical fact that Hamilton was shot by Burr in the same way that we know Joseph Smith had sex with multiple women, some as young as 14.
That is historical fact. There is no such thing as undisputed historical fact except in the cockeyed world of TBMormonism.
This is an excellent example of the problems involved in asserting "undisputed historical fact."
One moment in annihilation's waste, one moment, of the well of life to taste- The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste! -Omar Khayaam
Jason Bourne wrote:No. THere are many undisputed fact. Joseph Smith was shot in June 27, 1844. This is an undisputed historical fact.
Really? I thought he fell out of a window and died. Hmm, church videos and lessons really are not clear but the Mormons be damned if they don't have motab belting out "Oh Poor wayfaring man of grief".
I think you know what I was getting at when isolating Mormonism, Jason. To a TBM it is an undisputed fact that joe saw god and Christ while he was praying in the grove.
That would be "A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief."
One moment in annihilation's waste, one moment, of the well of life to taste- The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste! -Omar Khayaam
Boaz & Lidia wrote:Q: When do we trust the passed down word of subjective followers over objective historical facts?
A: In church
I realize you feel the need to turn everything into some kind of instrument with which to beat the Church, but maybe you could just try answering the question. Or maybe you did. You believe in undisputed historical fact.
One moment in annihilation's waste, one moment, of the well of life to taste- The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste! -Omar Khayaam
Julius Caesar existed and was an important Roman figure.
Some things are disputed:
Was he bisexual? That whole King of Bithnyia thing makes you wonder...but nothing after that. Hmm...it's a matter of perception after that. But people agree that Caesar existed. Now the problem with Book of Mormon claims is that they can't even establish Part 1, the Nephites existed. The best Mormons have, as DCP started his recent speech with, is the spiritual witness. Guess what, that's not evidence, that's an excuse for lack of evidence.
But beyond the written accounts (first hand, second hand, anecdotal etc) you have to look at the physical evidence.
Dinosaurs existed and we know that cause of bones. No written accounts but the physical evidence is concrete right?
All that Book of Mormon stuff is based only upon the Book of Mormon story (not first hand account). No physical evidence (or evidence that is vastly outta date like Mammoths or Mammoths on an island off the coast of Alaska) so you have to take the issue with a mighty big hunk of salt. your second hand manuscript (the Golden Plates) disappeared so...also no first hand accounts, even though those Mayans were writing. So you end up with at the minimum, a 3rd hand account with no supporting physical evidence. Hopefully people will use their common sense, but I dispair that some people have any.