Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

[_zerinus]

You give your ignorance away here. Shulem used to be THE PREMIERE ******DEFENDER****** of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham. Back in the good ole days, he was taking on the Egyptologists themselves. I was as well. Your assumption is that we were never on the side of defending Joseph Smith and ultimately because of the evidence saw that it is futile to defend his wrong translations. We have already been on the side of Joseph Smith. Apparently you fail to know this. But you do now, so it's time you engage the evidence. No more excuses for you like this silliness we all are reading. Pony up, show us specifically HOW Joseph Smith got it right with the Book of Abraham papyri. We used to think he did, but we don't now.

I don’t care what he has done or is doing now. He is wrong about Joseph Smith.

[_Philo Sofee]

You give your ignorance away here. Shulem used to be THE PREMIERE ******DEFENDER****** of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham. Back in the good ole days, he was taking on the Egyptologists themselves. I was as well. Your assumption is that we were never on the side of defending Joseph Smith and ultimately because of the evidence saw that it is futile to defend his wrong translations. We have already been on the side of Joseph Smith. Apparently you fail to know this. But you do now, so it's time you engage the evidence. No more excuses for you like this silliness we all are reading. Pony up, show us specifically HOW Joseph Smith got it right with the Book of Abraham papyri. We used to think he did, but we don't now.

I don’t care what he has done or is doing now. He is wrong about Joseph Smith.

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future. You need to take better care of what you say then. He is not wrong about Joseph Smith's knowledge and how its false about the Egyptian. You have yet to engage him and show WHY Joseph Smith is right. What Egyptological aspect did Joseph get correct? You need to SHOW that. I am amazed you do not grasp this simpleton logic and necessity based on your claims. Don't you yet grasp that without evidence what you say is worthless? Are you honestly this thick?! Really, I am beginning to wonder if you ever graduated let alone listened from and in high school.
The church lied to you when it said all you have to do is bear pure testimony and things will go well. Pure testimony is pure bunk until it can be backed with actual evidence and analysis. How long are you going to remain asleep to this obvious aspect of the problem of Joseph Smith?

[_zerinus]

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future.

I think that stupidity is coming from you, and I am not interested in your crap.

[_Maksutov]

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future. You need to take better care of what you say then. He is not wrong about Joseph Smith's knowledge and how its false about the Egyptian. You have yet to engage him and show WHY Joseph Smith is right. What Egyptological aspect did Joseph get correct? You need to SHOW that. I am amazed you do not grasp this simpleton logic and necessity based on your claims. Don't you yet grasp that without evidence what you say is worthless? Are you honestly this thick?! Really, I am beginning to wonder if you ever graduated let alone listened from and in high school.
The church lied to you when it said all you have to do is bear pure testimony and things will go well. Pure testimony is pure bunk until it can be backed with actual evidence and analysis. How long are you going to remain asleep to this obvious aspect of the problem of Joseph Smith?

He doesn't care, Philo. He worships Smith and Smith can't be wrong. Lying for and about Smith is a badge of honor, showing devotion and loyalty. He fears the truth and so refuses to think or inquire. We all know it and see it.

[_Maksutov]

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future.

I think that stupidity is coming from you, and I am not interested in your crap.

You're afraid. Run away, scared little Z-boy. Stick your fingers in your ears and run, run, run.

[_sock puppet]

I don’t care what he [Shulem] has done or is doing now. He is wrong about Joseph Smith.

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. * * * I am amazed you do not grasp this simpleton logic and necessity based on your claims. Don't you yet grasp that without evidence what you say is worthless?

It is worth repeating--with drum roll, please: "without evidence what you say is worthless". That is the vast chasm at play here on MDB in almost all substantive disagreement. Not surprisingly, the LDS defenders betray their claim that faith is all you need to find truth, each time they hanker for a coincidence like NHM to be 'evidence'. Their minds yearn for logic and corroborating evidence. But all in all, "without evidence what you say is worthless".

[_Philo Sofee]

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future.

I think that stupidity is coming from you, and I am not interested in your crap.

Well then what are you doing here for? Lol! You don't want to converse, you want to preach. You make claims you can't defend and you expect us to all swoon?! Lol! You don't even read what I write, yet judge it crap? Lol! You a funny child.

[_Starbuck]

The Mormon way is no way to have an honest logical discussion about things. When words don't mean what they really mean and feelings Trump logic, there is no way to have a logic based discussion.

[_Philo Sofee]

But you FALSELY accused him and I ****DO***** care about you doing that. You stop that stupidity and things will go a bit better for you in the future. You need to take better care of what you say then. He is not wrong about Joseph Smith's knowledge and how its false about the Egyptian. You have yet to engage him and show WHY Joseph Smith is right. What Egyptological aspect did Joseph get correct? You need to SHOW that. I am amazed you do not grasp this simpleton logic and necessity based on your claims. Don't you yet grasp that without evidence what you say is worthless? Are you honestly this thick?! Really, I am beginning to wonder if you ever graduated let alone listened from and in high school.
The church lied to you when it said all you have to do is bear pure testimony and things will go well. Pure testimony is pure bunk until it can be backed with actual evidence and analysis. How long are you going to remain asleep to this obvious aspect of the problem of Joseph Smith?

He doesn't care, Philo. He worships Smith and Smith can't be wrong. Lying for and about Smith is a badge of honor, showing devotion and loyalty. He fears the truth and so refuses to think or inquire. We all know it and see it.

Yes indeed. The church has emasculated him and his brain. He has remained as a child and continues speaking as a child. He refuses to do what Paul said to do. But then it's only Paul, a mere midget compared to the almighty Joseph Smith. I shall call him child from now on until he repents and decides its worth growing up and maturing his thinking processes.

[_Chap]

I don’t care what he [Shulem] has done or is doing now. He is wrong about Joseph Smith.

It is worth repeating--with drum roll, please: "without evidence what you say is worthless". That is the vast chasm at play here on MormonDiscussions in almost all substantive disagreement. Not surprisingly, the LDS defenders betray their claim that faith is all you need to find truth, each time they hanker for a coincidence like NHM to be 'evidence'. Their minds yearn for logic and corroborating evidence. But all in all, "without evidence what you say is worthless".

Nicely put. When the apologists think that there really is some objective evidence is in favour of the Book of Mormon, they make a big, big noise about it, like it was really a game changer. Films, websites, articles, the lot.

But once it is punctured (and so far it always seems to be) ... they suddenly don't need anything so vulgar as evidence any more. Their burning in the bosom is infinitely superior.

However, in that case why bother with any evidence, ever? And why come here to argue, when you just KNOW?