harmony wrote:You just got through saying her argument(s) are useless, because they aren't published (at least I think that's what you just said).
It's not.
I don't understand that. How does being published give them any more standing than the website gives them? All anyone has to do is print them out and Voila! They're published.
harmony wrote:Brant. He knows the whole horse thing is ... well, what Trixie says it is.
If it's Trixie's old horse thing, I think I said so too.
harmony wrote:You just got through saying her argument(s) are useless, because they aren't published (at least I think that's what you just said).
It's not.
I don't understand that. How does being published give them any more standing than the website gives them? All anyone has to do is print them out and Voila! They're published.
Bull. You have always made a distinction between printed, published-by-a-press materials vs. online writings. This is the reason you gave for chickening out from the debate with Bob McCue.
Mister Scratch wrote:Bull. You have always made a distinction between printed, published-by-a-press materials vs. online writings.
I've never made the distinction that press-published arguments are intrinsically superior to self-published arguments.
That's the relevant argument here, and I've never made it.
Mister Scratch wrote:This is the reason you gave for chickening out from the debate with Bob McCue.
I gave several reasons for refusing his demand that I meet him for a formal public oral debate. The argument above was not among them.
You didn't? Could've fooled me:
I'll think about it. However, I have to say, candidly, that I'm rather disinclined. I've done a lot of debating -- in high school and, a few times, since then (e.g., with Mr. James White on a radio program, as well as with Dr. William Lane Craig and a group of his associates at an academic conference), and, although I'm reasonably good at it (I think quickly on my feet, etc.), I've never found it overly satisfying. As a method of getting at the truth, as opposed to demonstrating glibness, I think it considerably overrated. I prefer written publications (as in print).
In the posts above, DCP can be justified in considering a website like Beastie's to be a "published" on the web, without equating it with online debate. Beastie still has all the control over the flow of ideas. It's her website, so it says what she wants it to say, in the order she wants to say it, and so forth.
I don't think that her website being published on the internet makes it more like online debate in a public forum, than it is like a published article in a magazine. I don't see DCP backpedaling on this.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
as far as I know, no LDS apologists have addressed the issues Beastie brings up.
Why?
I'm pretty sure most apologists who are aware of the /Mesoamerica issues know the problems but they will not present a more honest picture.
Why?
Apologists wonder why they have a reputation for not being honest... well this is one of the reasons.
I'm NOT saying anyone lied, I'm saying they mislead.
For example, I am certain Brant, Dan, and others know there were not horses during Book of Mormon times yet they continually give the impression that there were.
Why?
Why not just address the issue?
I think it would be easier to just address the issue than it would to go on and on about why you won't address the issue. ;-)
~td~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
truth dancer wrote:For example, I am certain Brant, Dan, and others know there were not horses during Book of Mormon times yet they continually give the impression that there were. ~td~
TD, you've presented at Sunstone. What do you think would be the response, were Trixie to present her material there?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
truth dancer wrote:For example, I am certain Brant, Dan, and others know there were not horses during Book of Mormon times yet they continually give the impression that there were. ~td~
TD, you've presented at Sunstone. What do you think would be the response, were Trixie to present her material there?
I am fairly certain she would be VERY well received. Virtually everyone I have ever met at Sunstone has been respectful and kind.
I think most of the folks who attend Sunstone know most of the "issues" but some may be confused on the Mesoamerican information because of the misleading statements from some apologists.
There would be only one problem... who would they get to respond to her paper? ;-)
~td~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj