Racism and the Book of Mormon

[_why me]

But the kind of God that would reveal a mythical history to Joseph Smith that would then lead his followers for around 140 years to hold on to racist beliefs is a God that is beyond my limited understanding.

What kind of god would kill a man and a woman in the new testament for not being honest with their tithe? Or turn a woman into salt for looking back? Or drowning soldiers in the red sea? or...or....or....what kind of god would declare one group of people on this earth the chosen people? What about the pagans? God seems out to lunch for many years to all except the jewish people. What to do? It is ashame that we cannot make god to our liking.

The question is Mary is whether or not the three witnesses saw what they saw. Or were they on mushroom pills.

[Guest]

What kind of god would kill a man and a woman in the new testament for not being honest with their tithe? Or turn a woman into salt for looking back? Or drowning soldiers in the red sea? or...or....or....what kind of god would declare one group of people on this earth the chosen people? What about the pagans? God seems out to lunch for many years to all except the jewish people. What to do? It is ashame that we cannot make god to our liking.

And what kind of god would turn Medusa into a hideous monster for saying that Athena was jealous of her beauty? Or turn Arachne into a spider because she thought she was the best weaver in the world? Or make a king's wife fall in love with a bull and give birth to a part man, part bull monstrosity? or...or...or...

It's a shame we're stuck with the historical reality of the objective facts that Why Me and I are relating.

[_Darth J]

Given all that, the only reason to believe the Book of Mormon is non-historical is because you don't believe God is capable of bringing groups of people to this continent and you do not believe the Bible is historical as well.

Where's that Nephite artifact I asked you to show me, Tobin? Have you found it yet?

[_Darth J]

The question is Mary is whether or not the three witnesses saw what they saw. Or were they on mushroom pills.

No, that is not the question. The question is whether the inconsistent statements of three gullible, superstitious men with a vested interested in the Book of Mormon mean that there was a vast, thousand-year civilization of pre-Columbian Hebrews for which not a shred of evidence exists.

[_Chap]

Given all that, the only reason to believe the Book of Mormon is non-historical is because you don't believe God is capable of bringing groups of people to this continent and you do not believe the Bible is historical as well.

Where's that Nephite artifact I asked you to show me, Tobin? Have you found it yet?

Interesting that Tobin no longer refers to the 'you need to talk with God' stuff as a reason for believing that all that Book of Mormon business really happened.

Could it be that my earlier post about temporal lobe epilepsy has made him wonder whether his guilty vision of his favorite deity (or indeed any other visions of a deity) had any basis other than some neurons misbehaving in his skull?

viewtopic.php?p=646236#p646236

Despite the fact that he is a confirmed atheist, when he was 43, Rudi had a powerful religious vision which convinced him he had gone to hell.

"I was told that I had gone there because I had not been a devout Christian, a believer in God. I was very depressed at the thought that I was going to remain there forever."

[_why me]

No, that is not the question. The question is whether the inconsistent statements of three gullible, superstitious men with a vested interested in the Book of Mormon mean that there was a vast, thousand-year civilization of pre-Columbian Hebrews for which not a shred of evidence exists.

And if there were sheds of evidence you would be a god fearing person, a wonderful member of the LDS church looking forward to death. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I wish it did. But....no such luck.

I can't say that these men were gullible. They had an experience that they couldn't deny...so something happened at that time. Usually, the mind can lessen the experience as time wears on...but not with these guys. They kept on bearing their tesimony right up to the end. Go figure.

[Guest]

...

[_Chap]

Why would Tobin change his habbits based on your pompous retorts?

Its Most assuredly because of my comments towards Tobin that changed his demeanor. Specifically the Star Trek parody.

Can you give me a link to that?

Anything that keeps Tobin out of his 'You need to talk with God' loop and gets him to change his hobbits is fine by me.

[_Darth J]

No, that is not the question. The question is whether the inconsistent statements of three gullible, superstitious men with a vested interested in the Book of Mormon mean that there was a vast, thousand-year civilization of pre-Columbian Hebrews for which not a shred of evidence exists.

And if there were sheds of evidence you would be a god fearing person, a wonderful member of the LDS church looking forward to death. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I wish it did. But....no such luck.

Challenge accepted, Why Me!

You find me an artifact or two from the Nephites, and then we'll see how I react. I'll even give you a couple of handicaps, like accepting your specious assumption that if the Book of Mormon is true, then the modern LDS Church must be the true church.

For comparative purposes, this would be like if there were no evidence of a British civilization in England between 1012 C.E. and the present time.

I can't say that these men were gullible.

Then you are necessarily implying that Oliver Cowdery's magic stick really worked, that Martin Harris really saw Jesus in the form of a deer while walking in the woods, that God really did tell David Whitmer to leave Joseph Smith and start his (Whitmer's) own church, etc.

They had an experience that they couldn't deny...so something happened at that time.

Regrettably, I must inform you that these men did not have one, singular experience. Martin Harris was not with Oliver and David when the former allegedly had an experience inconsistently described as visionary and physically tangible.

Usually, the mind can lessen the experience as time wears on...but not with these guys.

Again, I am sorry that you are so hopelessly unfamiliar with the facts that you robotically insist are Mormonism's Trump card, but David Whitmer et al. did give inconsistent descriptions of what they supposedly experienced.

They kept on bearing their tesimony right up to the end. Go figure.

The thread you're looking for is here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=24536

Refute away!

[Guest]

...