Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Maksutov »

Uncle Ed wrote:Existence Is the proof for "God". Existence is not caused. Everything manifesting as part of "creation", i.e. the world of humans (the universe) is Existence manifesting.

If this is not true, then how about taking a stab at answering the question, "what is existence?"...


Why does existence prove God? How do you know existence is not caused. You're just throwing stuff out to see what sticks.

How about you read Sartre's Being and Nothingness? He would tell you that existence precedes essence, and there is no need for "God" to explain anything.

How about you take a stab at answering the question "what is God?" I guarantee you won't find consensus among your fellow humans, so you're really left with your own subjective, private experiences unless you seek to understand the universe objectively.
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_Uncle Ed
_Emeritus
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Uncle Ed »

beastie wrote:
Uncle Ed wrote:I believe that Joseph Smith tried to not lie to himself. He was a man wholly devoted to the truth. .


Was Joseph Smith telling the truth when he claimed to see treasures buried underground, guarded by spirits who made them slip beyond reach into the ground?

He was very young, and later admitted that at this time in his life he fell into error as the youthful will, but did not commit any big sins. He also asserted that he had never premeditated a sin and then followed through, as such was not in his nature. Perhaps he exaggerated what was going on with the money digging ventures, had his attack of conscience, prayed for forgiveness, and received it. It's called repentance. Imperfect people have to do it all the time. That's what someone wholly devoted to the truth does, repent....
A man should never step a foot into the field,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need arms,
Or what menace meet on the road. - Hávamál 38

Man's joy is in Man. - Hávamál 47
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _beastie »

Uncle Ed wrote:
beastie wrote:He was very young, and later admitted that at this time in his life he fell into error as the youthful will, but did not commit any big sins. He also asserted that he had never premeditated a sin and then followed through, as such was not in his nature. Perhaps he exaggerated what was going on with the money digging ventures, had his attack of conscience, prayed for forgiveness, and received it. It's called repentance. Imperfect people have to do it all the time. That's what someone wholly devoted to the truth does, repent....



All those words and you can't bring yourself to actually say "Yes, Joseph Smith lied". There's no exaggeration when it comes to claiming to see something one simply never saw.
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
_Uncle Ed
_Emeritus
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Uncle Ed »

Equality wrote:...

The mopologists who have foolishly claimed “victory” in the 50-page debate completely miss the point. No, the Johnsons’ research does not stick a fork in Mormonism. It’s not a silver bullet against the Book of Mormon or any other exhausted metaphor. It is, instead, an exciting development in Mormon studies. The kneejerk negative response from the mopologists who have been alternatively trying to discredit the study or accept its findings while downplaying their significance reveals an unjustifiably intense insecurity about the strength of the position they advocate.

The amount of insecurity is shown by the level of resistance to the study and the assertions of "influence" from other books. The more insecure, the more the denial. The most insecure are the most wedded to the "faith promoting history" version that the LDS Church teaches, which doesn't even allow Joseph Smith to stick his face into a hat, much less take his phraseology and descriptive terms and plot devices from a wealth of conscious and unconscious source material....
A man should never step a foot into the field,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need arms,
Or what menace meet on the road. - Hávamál 38

Man's joy is in Man. - Hávamál 47
_Uncle Ed
_Emeritus
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Uncle Ed »

Maksutov wrote:
Uncle Ed wrote:Existence Is the proof for "God". Existence is not caused. Everything manifesting as part of "creation", i.e. the world of humans (the universe) is Existence manifesting.

If this is not true, then how about taking a stab at answering the question, "what is existence?"...


Why does existence prove God? How do you know existence is not caused. You're just throwing stuff out to see what sticks.

If "existence" is caused, what is the cause? No answer. Existence Is. Nothing else can be claimed to equal or transcend that concept. If you have an alternate concept, then please share.

...
How about you take a stab at answering the question "what is God?" I guarantee you won't find consensus among your fellow humans, so you're really left with your own subjective, private experiences unless you seek to understand the universe objectively.

Asking "what is God" is asking a lesser question than "what is existence?" Any god concept is finite by comparison to Existence, which even our finite minds can apprehend infinitely extends beyond the world of humans. So asking "what is existence?" is the most direct question, if Existence Is God....
A man should never step a foot into the field,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need arms,
Or what menace meet on the road. - Hávamál 38

Man's joy is in Man. - Hávamál 47
_Uncle Ed
_Emeritus
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Uncle Ed »

beastie wrote:
All those words and you can't bring yourself to actually say "Yes, Joseph Smith lied". There's no exaggeration when it comes to claiming to see something one simply never saw.

Is that what you want to see in print? Oh, alright: Joseph Smith lied.

It was a little lie, a "whopper" digging in the fields of superstition.

He repented. Are you saying he didn't? There is no evidence of recidivism back to money digging....
A man should never step a foot into the field,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need arms,
Or what menace meet on the road. - Hávamál 38

Man's joy is in Man. - Hávamál 47
_The Erotic Apologist
_Emeritus
Posts: 3050
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:07 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _The Erotic Apologist »

Uncle Ed wrote:
beastie wrote:
All those words and you can't bring yourself to actually say "Yes, Joseph Smith lied". There's no exaggeration when it comes to claiming to see something one simply never saw.

Is that what you want to see in print? Oh, all right: Joseph Smith lied.

It was a little lie, a "whopper" digging in the fields of superstition.

He repented. Are you saying he didn't? There is no evidence of recidivism back to money digging....


I think it's pretty clear that Joseph graduated from telling relatively small lies about money digging and went on to tell bigger and more lucrative lies involving the solvency of the Kirtland Safety Society--to name but one example.
Surprise, surprise, there is no divine mandate for the Church to discuss and portray its history accurately.
--Yahoo Bot

I pray thee, sir, forgive me for the mess. And whether I shot first, I'll not confess.
--Han Solo, from William Shakespeare's Star Wars
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _beastie »

Uncle Ed wrote:Is that what you want to see in print? Oh, all right: Joseph Smith lied.

It was a little lie, a "whopper" digging in the fields of superstition.

He repented. Are you saying he didn't? There is no evidence of recidivism back to money digging....


He cheated several people out of hard-earned money. That's not a little lie. And it also contradicts this assertion of yours:

Uncle Ed wrote:I believe that Joseph Smith tried to not lie to himself. He was a man wholly devoted to the truth.
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
_Sammy Jankins
_Emeritus
Posts: 1864
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:56 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Sammy Jankins »

_Mary
_Emeritus
Posts: 1774
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Mary »

Sammy Jankins wrote:The latest from the Interpreter.

A Bayesian Cease-Fire in the Late War on the Book of Mormon


Good grief. Is this the best they can do? Talk about blinding with science.

So he's saying that the probability of LW directly influencing, as in :
“was deliberately and physically used by Joseph Smith in his composition of the Book of Mormon.”
the Book of Mormon is 60/40? So there is no smoking gun? If correct, those are still impressive odds?

Using the same analysis however what would the Book of Commandments score, and would this impact on the validity of the findings?
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov
Post Reply