You're right. There isn't room for faith here. The full story looks invented and "faith" in this instance looks like what so many confidence persons demand of their victims, belief in the highly questionable. Also, I don't think I am the one that is demanding in this instance. Believers are asked, unreasonably in my estimation, to believe a story that looks concocted to anyone not immersed in the religious culture. Then they are required to devote a lot of time and money to the cause. The guy claimed God spoke to him through an ordinary rock, the same rock he used to pull his buried treasure confidence games. That is a tough fact to overcome. I think that is where the story should have ended.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:36 pmThere is always going to be the woulda, coulda, shoulda, isn’t there? And how MUCH of each of those that are necessary will vary from person to person.Dr Exiled wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:04 pm
MG 2.0:
I think you are highlighting the insignificant to hide the damning details of the story. Joseph Smith refused to show the plates to the world and let experts test his supposed translation. He conveniently claimed that the plates were taken back by the angel (moroni/nephi - uncertain which). He used a freaking rock and a hat to do the supposed translation for heaven's sake! If he truly had a gift, the plates would be around today and reformed egyptian would have been discovered. Experts would have validated his translation. There would have been discovery after discovery tying the Nephites to the old world, etc. Instead, we have appeals to how much Joseph Smith sacrificed and worked at his con. Of course Joseph Smith had to work as circumstances dictated. He had to continue to support his con or noble lie. Otherwise, the evil critics that demanded proof would have won and we wouldn't be having this conversation today.
Your requirements are fairly demanding.
Almost no room left for faith.
Regards,
MG
Peterson the historical skeptic
-
- God
- Posts: 1773
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
-
- God
- Posts: 5665
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
Oh come on. I had to stop there because, seriously, there is NOTHING in your posts that suggests you have that mindset. NOTHING.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 amI think we all are subject, at least to some extent, to our environmental conditions and upbringing. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Some folks, however, tend to be a bit more curious about the world and all things in it. That would be me. I suppose that’s why I chose teaching as a career.Marcus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:55 pm
So, if you weren't raised Mormon and consequently didn't feel the need to come here and irrationally defend your Mormon position, you would possibly be inclined to agree with canpakes' comments. That is an extremely telling comment. Thank you for being honest about that.
I tend, like canpakes, to be built with a somewhat skeptical mind. I like to have proof.
let me guess. You're not a great guesser.And I still can’t tell to any degree of specificity who YOU are at all. If I were to guess, you’re actually a woman using a male moniker. Aged somewhere between twenty five and thirty. No older than that.
Nope. You come here to disrupt conversations and troll people you inexplicably think you are superior to, but you also don't really believe what you are pushing. You are a compete open book.By the way, a large reason I come here is simply to bounce things around and to keep my mind actively engaged in writing.
- Doctor CamNC4Me
- God
- Posts: 9419
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
BuuuuuuuuuullSHIT. You’re actually the opposite of what you described. You’re irredeemably incurious about faith outside of Mormonism. And you're termInally gullible when it comes to Mormonism’s truth claims. You’ve never given any other major faith tradition 1/1,000th the attention you’ve given your patently ridiculous religion. If what you’ve posted wasn’t so you it’d be laughably absurd.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 amI think we all are subject, at least to some extent, to our environmental conditions and upbringing. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Some folks, however, tend to be a bit more curious about the world and all things in it. That would be me. I suppose that’s why I chose teaching as a career.Marcus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:55 pm
So, if you weren't raised Mormon and consequently didn't feel the need to come here and irrationally defend your Mormon position, you would possibly be inclined to agree with canpakes' comments. That is an extremely telling comment. Thank you for being honest about that.
I tend, like canpakes, to be built with a somewhat skeptical mind.
- Doc
Trump is a fraud and is leading the white working class to disaster. - JD Vance
-
- God
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
Just out of interest, if God spoke to you back in the early eighteen hundreds and you had little or no experience with ‘god’, how would you expect he may have communicated with you? And if he were to have you write a book, what do you see as being the process…ways and means…by which he would have done so.
Serious question.
Regards,
MG
-
- God
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
Like I said, somewhere between twenty five and thirty. And before you rush to judgement, I have nothing against young folks within this age category. But I have certain expectations, and not others.Marcus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:27 amOh come on. I had to stop there because, seriously, there is NOTHING in your posts that suggests you have that mindset. NOTHING.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 am
I think we all are subject, at least to some extent, to our environmental conditions and upbringing. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Some folks, however, tend to be a bit more curious about the world and all things in it. That would be me. I suppose that’s why I chose teaching as a career.
I tend, like canpakes, to be built with a somewhat skeptical mind. I like to have proof.
let me guess. You're not a great guesser.And I still can’t tell to any degree of specificity who YOU are at all. If I were to guess, you’re actually a woman using a male moniker. Aged somewhere between twenty five and thirty. No older than that.Nope. You come here to disrupt conversations and troll people you inexplicably think you are superior to, but you also don't really believe what you are pushing. You are a compete open book.By the way, a large reason I come here is simply to bounce things around and to keep my mind actively engaged in writing.
Regards,
MG
-
- God
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
You’re not very interesting. Or engaging.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:28 amBuuuuuuuuuullSHIT. You’re actually the opposite of what you described. You’re irredeemably incurious about faith outside of Mormonism. And you're termInally gullible when it comes to Mormonism’s truth claims. You’ve never given any other major faith tradition 1/1,000th the attention you’ve given your patently ridiculous religion. If what you’ve posted wasn’t so you it’d be laughably absurd.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 am
I think we all are subject, at least to some extent, to our environmental conditions and upbringing. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Some folks, however, tend to be a bit more curious about the world and all things in it. That would be me. I suppose that’s why I chose teaching as a career.
I tend, like canpakes, to be built with a somewhat skeptical mind.
- Doc
Regards,
MG
-
- God
- Posts: 5665
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
I would add gullible to the truth claims without actually thinking through what they say they believe. The product of being raised Mormon from the womb.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:28 amBuuuuuuuuuullSHIT. You’re actually the opposite of what you described. You’re irredeemably incurious about faith outside of Mormonism. And you're termInally gullible when it comes to Mormonism’s truth claims. You’ve never given any other major faith tradition 1/1,000th the attention you’ve given your patently ridiculous religion. If what you’ve posted wasn’t so you it’d be laughably absurd.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:12 am
I think we all are subject, at least to some extent, to our environmental conditions and upbringing. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Some folks, however, tend to be a bit more curious about the world and all things in it. That would be me. I suppose that’s why I chose teaching as a career.
I tend, like canpakes, to be built with a somewhat skeptical mind.
- Doc
-
- God
- Posts: 5665
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
: D You're a very weird dude. Keep your "expectations" to yourself.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:32 amLike I said, somewhere between twenty five and thirty. And before you rush to judgement, I have nothing against young folks within this age category. But I have certain expectations, and not others.Marcus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:27 am
Oh come on. I had to stop there because, seriously, there is NOTHING in your posts that suggests you have that mindset. NOTHING.
let me guess. You're not a great guesser.
Nope. You come here to disrupt conversations and troll people you inexplicably think you are superior to, but you also don't really believe what you are pushing. You are a compete open book.
Regards,
MG
-
- God
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
-
- Prophet
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2020 3:48 am
Re: Peterson the historical skeptic
Totally picking up a DCP vibe here.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:33 amYou’re not very interesting. Or engaging.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:28 am
BuuuuuuuuuullSHIT. You’re actually the opposite of what you described. You’re irredeemably incurious about faith outside of Mormonism. And you're termInally gullible when it comes to Mormonism’s truth claims. You’ve never given any other major faith tradition 1/1,000th the attention you’ve given your patently ridiculous religion. If what you’ve posted wasn’t so you it’d be laughably absurd.
- Doc
Regards,
MG