Strike two.
Regards,
MG
Keep in mind that your original response to the links and information. I provided was:Shulem wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:25 amMG 2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:01 amAs I interact with folks like Philo and others I can see the danger in taking absolutist/dogmatic/fundamentalist positions on anything having to do with religion, and Mormonism in particular. And then sticking to it until hell freezes over. Except for the fundamentals of course.
Philo, Philo, are you still there?
Okay, so here we are, TOGETHER, we share our thoughts and aspirations, etc.
MG, thank you for showing me your card, the volcanic card. Live long and prosper, my friend.
I will address this soon enough. Allow me to collect my thoughts. You should know that Joseph Smith had ideas and thoughts about volcanos and the ancient formation of lands prior to when he dictated the Book of Mormon.
My guess is that things haven’t changed.Personally, I wouldn't waste my time with any of that apologetic rubbish.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=154675&hilit=volcanic&start=50
When you get to strike three will you stop derailing?
Dum da dum dum. Dum da dum dum waaaa.
I think I shall. I’ll check back at a later date and see what others have to say in response to your new information not yet published. Until then.
Imagine what Joseph could have included one week after the Grovers Mill invasion in 1938.
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 12:21 amEarlier (on the other thread I think?) I brought up volcanism and links that went into specific detail. The eastern seaboard doesn’t fit the narrative in the Book of Mormon. Both you and Brandley have to ignore the internal narrative in order to justify/support your theories in regards to Delmarva. Yes, I know you responded…but your response was dependent on the Book of Mormon being a fictional production. I suppose that this divide between our presuppositions is probably insurmountable. The author of the critique I linked to in regards to Brandley’s theory brings up issues with his Book of Mormon geography. How many of those issues/objections would the correlate with your Delmarva I can’t say. That’s why, earlier, I asked you to simply point out how your Delmarva theory differentiates itself enough from Brandley’s in order to be immune from those same criticisms.
That is the simple question I’m interested in having you answer when all is said and done.
Although, again, it doesn’t really matter because I think both of you, nonbeliever and believer have a problem to deal with in explaining the contradictions within the narrative and the geography of the eastern seaboard of the United States. That’s not an issue for you, I know.
Joseph wasn’t smart enough to know that volcanism and it’s effects (albeit the incomplete understanding of ‘darkness’ used in the narrative by either Mormon or the original author) were an anachronistic entry into the narrative. C’mon. Dumb one minute, a genius the next?
Anyway, that’s my main beef with Brandley and yourself. Delmarva doesn’t fit the COMPLETE description of the events leading up to Christ’s visit to the Americas. Some of the mesoamercan models do, in the main. I had linked you to one example, but you didn’t want anything to do with it because it was the work of an apologist.
Shulem, I think that it is readily apparent that the divide between yourself and believers is insurmountable. But that’s OK. It’s fine to have different view out there in the marketplace for people to choose from. And it’s totally cool that you have a passion for your ‘truth’ and feel a compunction to put it out there.
I have always thought the church's position of remaining neutral on issues is profoundly questionable considering it has access to He Who Knows All, and LOVES to give revelation to the church. Joseph Smith asked the most trivial and silly questions of Jesus and they are all recorded in the published canonized D&C! Of COURSE Jesus will answer your questions you prophets. And yet, on so many issues the church doesn't get the answers and instead pretends to neutrality?! That is downright weird.Shulem wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:31 pm
Yes, I'm afraid that I have done just that. I predict the Delmarva model will eventually become the universal model accepted by former members of the Church and critics alike. First of all, critics and apostates don't believe the story is true and recognize it as pure fiction. But in spite of that nobody should think Smith didn't have a place in mind where he visualized his story and had some kind of backdrop in which to base the geography and location. I've spent quite a bit of time discussing that and it doesn't make any sense at all to think Smith didn't think in those terms when telling his story.
And so, Delmarva works. It has everything going for it and its right where Smith needed it to be to work hi mojo and bring the gold plates to his back door. Nobody really believes Moroni hefted a golden book thousands of miles. That's just the stupidest thing I've ever heard. People that believe that are just plain stupid. They've checked their brains in and handed their souls to the Church like the dummies they are. In the mean time the Church takes no official position on geography because it's stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm going to squeeze the Church with that rock and its going to get much harder before all this is said and done. The Church is in real trouble because the world is not going to put up with its nonsense. The world is moving forward. The Church doesn't know how to do that and so it takes no position.
Philo Sofee wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:49 pmI have always thought the church's position of remaining neutral on issues is profoundly questionable considering it has access to He Who Knows All, and LOVES to give revelation to the church. Joseph Smith asked the most trivial and silly questions of Jesus and they are all recorded in the published canonized D&C! Of COURSE Jesus will answer your questions you prophets. And yet, on so many issues the church doesn't get the answers and instead pretends to neutrality?! That is downright weird.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wrote:This history contains information about the places they lived, including descriptions of landforms, natural features, and the distances and cardinal directions between important points. The internal consistency of these descriptions is one of the striking features of the Book of Mormon.