Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Book of Mormon points us to God the Father and Jesus Christ. We are taught to keep the commandments. People should not call good evil.
God chose Moses to do his work. The Egyptian was the one at fault, not Moses.
You always have to remember that JS taught that God the Father, and his Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead. That is a true statement, so withdraw your lie that all of the writings of JS are lies.All of the writings of JS are lies and they do not tell of the true God.
The Book of Mormon is a fictional piece of literature, conjured up by your false prophet.The Book of Mormon points us to God the Father and Jesus Christ. We are taught to keep the commandments. People should not call good evil.
If it was what you say, it would not have stood up to scrutiny, but it has and still does.The Book of Mormon is a fictional piece of literature, conjured up by your false prophet.
If it was what you say, it would not have stood up to scrutiny, but it has and still does.
If it was what you say, it would not have stood up to scrutiny, but it has and still does.
It cannot hold up to any kind of serious scrutiny outside of the lds church. No credible evidence of the people or places ever existing. No evidence of the golden plates ever existing. No Reformed Egyptian as a language. Quoting a bunch of Scripture and inserting it into a fairy tale does not make it true nor make it the word of God.If it was what you say, it would not have stood up to scrutiny, but it has and still does.
It is the word of God.Do you think everyone is so gullible and/or stupid as to endorse fiction as the word of God?
I am neither deceived or dishonest. Yes there is credible evidence:It cannot hold up to any kind of serious scrutiny outside of the lds church. No credible evidence of the people or places ever existing. No evidence of the golden plates ever existing. No Reformed Egyptian as a language. Quoting a bunch of Scripture and inserting it into a fairy tale does not make it true nor make it the word of God.
You are either deceived or intentionally being dishonest.
I said credible evidence. Verifiable by non-lds sources. All you've given is lds-related sources. Not credible.I am neither deceived or dishonest. Yes there is credible evidence:
Mounting Evidence for the Book of Mormon
Archaeological and Historical Evidence - Evidences of The Book of Mormon
https://bookofmormonfacts.com/book-of-mormon-mounting-evidence/
(Book of Mormon | Preface 8 Witnesses:Heading - 1)There is zero evidence for any golden plates.
So why do you think LDS sources are not credible or verifiable? I believe they are both credible and verifiable.I said credible evidence. Verifiable by non-lds sources. All you've given is lds-related sources. Not credible.
To quote your first source, this is how the lds views evidence:
Of course, scholarship does not replace spiritual witness as a source of testimony. As Elder B. H. Roberts (1857–1933) of the Seventy said: “The power of the Holy Ghost … must ever be the chief source of evidence for the Book of Mormon. All other evidence is secondary. … No arrangement of evidence, however skillfully ordered; no argument, however adroitly made, can ever take its place.”
IOW, testimony first, evidence... eh, whatever.
So why do you think LDS sources are not credible or verifiable? I believe they are both credible and verifiable.
When I was on the atheist forum they were always talking about peer reviewed material and anecdotal evidence. I can't understand why someone is unable to verify something themselves.Whether or not something is credible has nothing to do with what you or anyone personally thinks. LDS-internal sources like The Ensign, LDS websites, etc. are not peer reviewed, so they're not credible or valid in the wider non-LDS world, which is where you are right now.
When I was on the atheist forum they were always talking about peer reviewed material and anecdotal evidence. I can't understand why someone is unable to verify something themselves.
You told me one time if you were in central America and Jesus came down to you and told you that the BOM was a true book, especially the part about him coming to the America's, that you would turn around and run, because you would know that it was a demon parading as an angel of light.Because it's not up to any layman (someone not trained in the relevant fields) to evaluate claims relevant to the fields that the Mormon religion manipulates to keep its people believing that it's actually based in something real. That is why peer review is important: it takes the research or supposed research out of the hands of anyone who might approve of it for non-scientific reasons (e.g., religious narrative) and evaluates it according to the standard of the relevant field. The individual who looks at it without the requisite background/training, and even worse maybe with the inherent biases for/against it (e.g., religious narrative again), cannot be trusted to do that. You don't ask a random person to perform heart surgery, do you? All the sciences ought to be treated similarly.
Like in my case, I'm a linguist, so while I'm not saying I'm an authority on anything (because I'm not; I've been asked to fill in for adjunct professors sometimes, but please no one confuse me for an actual professor...hopefully my frequent typos and grammatical mistakes made here on CF rule that out), I'm at least trained to evaluate claims relevant to my field. And when I do that with the linguistic Mormonism, as I have many times before on this board, they don't stand up to even minimal scrutiny.
I strongly suspect that the same would be true if we had instead a trained anthropologist, archaeologist, geographer, etc. here to evaluate Mormon claims. I can say that with some degree of confidence because, again, being trained in an academic field I know the proper process to go through to have your research scientifically vetted (it's how I got my degree in the first place; I wrote a thesis and defended it successfully before the board, which is roughly analogous to what happens to research papers submitted for publication, in that they too go through a process of review, correction, and resubmission), so it's really easy to tell when that hasn't been done, as is the case in the vast majority of Mormon publications. There's a reason why they're "internal", i.e., published by BYU and other organs of the Mormon religion. If they want to be taken seriously by the rest of the world, it is imperative that Mormon researchers actually operate according to the impartial, secular standards of the relevant fields. That they mostly don't do that is very telling.
You told me one time if you were in central America and Jesus came down to you and told you that the BOM was a true book, especially the part about him coming to the America's, that you would turn around and run, because you would know that it was a demon parading as an angel of light.
IOW, no matter what would be presented to you in regards to the BOM, you would not believe it, Ph.D or peer reviews by non LDS. You would not believe it. Do you know why I know that?
I have given you 10 items that JS said existed in the Americas in 1830, that you personally would have laughed at and mocked him for being so stupid to say such a silly stupid thing. Only to be found to be archaeologically true by non-LDS many years later. And you pushed it aside as if it was garbage.
So your sincere words ring hollow.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?