Recovery Board
: RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum.
Those in the know will realise that Book of Mormon archealogical evidence is embarrassingly scant, well actually non-existent.
So why don't any TBMs question this? Is it that they've been programmed by leaders to not look at physical evidence and only focus on warm fuzzies from reading it (for obvious reasons)? Is it because FARMS exists and therefore those who do start to probe will be satisfied with their surface rhetoric? Is it that some naively believe that anything Aztec, Mayan or otherwise is actually Nephite/Lamanite?
It's so obvious that there is no physical proof of any BoM nation with potentially millions of inhabitants, how on earth does TSCC get away with such unquestioning membership on the whole?
So why don't any TBMs question this? Is it that they've been programmed by leaders to not look at physical evidence and only focus on warm fuzzies from reading it (for obvious reasons)? Is it because FARMS exists and therefore those who do start to probe will be satisfied with their surface rhetoric? Is it that some naively believe that anything Aztec, Mayan or otherwise is actually Nephite/Lamanite?
It's so obvious that there is no physical proof of any BoM nation with potentially millions of inhabitants, how on earth does TSCC get away with such unquestioning membership on the whole?
Someone posted some silly film still claiming the Aztecs/Mayans had BofM ties. I commented that Thomas Ferguson spent his life's fortune trying to prove the BofM and found none. Some helpful TBM replied, "He was looking in the wrong places."
Apparently, it doesn't bother them and they don't get why it worries you so much.
Apparently, it doesn't bother them and they don't get why it worries you so much.
Exactly, it doesn't bother them, they just assume there is good evidence for the BOM. They don't study, think, or question anything because the church works well in their lives.
They want to be comfortable far more than they want truth.
They do not demand answers, because they do not study enough to know the questions, or that there even are questions.
They skim along on the surface of their lives, happy to know that their family will be together 4ever.
They spend all their time living for the "next" life, not this one, never suspecting this may well be the only life they have.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2011 01:35PM by think4u.
They want to be comfortable far more than they want truth.
They do not demand answers, because they do not study enough to know the questions, or that there even are questions.
They skim along on the surface of their lives, happy to know that their family will be together 4ever.
They spend all their time living for the "next" life, not this one, never suspecting this may well be the only life they have.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2011 01:35PM by think4u.
For the same reason they don't question the fact that the plates weren't shown to anybody- You have to have FAAAAIIIITH!
they still believe the 10 lost tribe are hidden behind a wall of ice and in the last days a highway will raise from the depths and they will show themselves bringing new scripture.
They also believe John the Beloved is immortal
They believe the 3 Nephites are immortal
They believe the sealed portion of the plates will still be translated
They believe blacks will become white and delightsome
They believe Jesus will return and set up Zion in the USA and in Jerusalem.
They believe Cain still walks the earth curse and is tall covered in hair
They believe dunking alive people will count for the dead being baptized.
They still believe the temple stuff actually came from Solomons temple.
They believe Joseph Smith only joined the Freemasons to learn what they knew about temple secrets
They believe Jesus and Satan are brothers.
The believe in a magic called the priesthood where they can hold up their arm to the square and summon the power of God at will.
BoM geography is one of the less kooky things they believe in...lol
They also believe John the Beloved is immortal
They believe the 3 Nephites are immortal
They believe the sealed portion of the plates will still be translated
They believe blacks will become white and delightsome
They believe Jesus will return and set up Zion in the USA and in Jerusalem.
They believe Cain still walks the earth curse and is tall covered in hair
They believe dunking alive people will count for the dead being baptized.
They still believe the temple stuff actually came from Solomons temple.
They believe Joseph Smith only joined the Freemasons to learn what they knew about temple secrets
They believe Jesus and Satan are brothers.
The believe in a magic called the priesthood where they can hold up their arm to the square and summon the power of God at will.
BoM geography is one of the less kooky things they believe in...lol
of scientific discipline, the less likely we are to have people who also think clearly on issues like nuclear power. The more likely they are to accept whatever some paid 'expert' tells them.
Sorry, ideas are colliding in my brain today.
Sorry, ideas are colliding in my brain today.
and don't ever forget it. NEVER LET THE FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A FAITH-PROMOTING STORY! It's really easy if you don't think about it. And, let's face it, most TBMs don't think about the things they don't think about.
Being a prophet, he would never decieve the people. That "testimony" trumps scientific evidence, and lack thereof.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 02:26PM by metatron.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 02:26PM by metatron.
Here is a man who is the expert in his field that has worked side by side with Mormon archeologists and even he does not understand how the mormons do not put two and two together on this subject.
Mormon apologetic assertions about evidence for the BOM are not published outside of the mormon bubble. There is a reason for this. It would be like publishing a paper on the reality of a flat earth or middle earth. FAIR, FARMS, MADD or whatever or whomever they call themselves can never venture outside the playhouse. Mormon apologists have nothing for evidence except “plausible conjecture”.
Here is the link for the interview. It is fantastic.
I wish all to receive it.
http://www.pbs.org/mormons/interviews/coe.html
HIGHLIGHTS
Coe's opinion of Joseph Smith
Why Joseph Smith believed the Book of Mormon took place in Central America
The challenges facing Mormon archaeologists attempting to prove the Book of Mormon
Excerpts:
“Coe is the Charles J. MacCurdy professor emeritus of Anthropology at Yale University and curator emeritus of the Division of Anthropology at the school's Peabody Museum of Natural History. He is an expert on the Maya, who inhabited the same part of Mexico and Central American where Mormon scholars say the events of the Book of Mormon took place. In this interview, Coe discusses the challenges facing Mormon archaeologists attempting to prove the historical truth of their central scripture and his own views on Joseph Smith. This is an edited transcript of an interview conducted May 16, 2006.”
“... The 19th century and the passion for archaeology, the questions that were being asked: Locate Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon in that world.
The world that Joseph Smith lived in, in upstate New York, the so-called Burned-Over District, where all of these new religions were popping up, was one where there were vestiges of ancient Americans -- I mean, real archaeological sites with mounds -- and these were found all through the area that he traveled through; in Ohio especially, incredible mound sites. We could now know what cultures they belong to. In his day, ... the theory was, among most white Americans, that this had nothing to do with the American Indians that they saw around them, that they were made by other races who had come over. There are all sorts of theories: They could be Jews or Welshmen or Vikings or what have you [who] had made those mounds. ...
Of course the basis of it is totally racist -- the idea that Native Americans, the dark-skinned people, could not do this by themselves, and it had to be light-skinned people. That's very much part of what was in Smith's mind at that time. So it was no surprise that he came up with this idea that the Angel Moroni had come to him and told him about these ancient Nephites and Lamanites and Jaredites and so forth. It was all kind of pre-adapted; he was pre-adapted to this, let's say. ...”
“Aren't these natural questions for people who are maybe a generation or two from Europe?
If these people who were living in New York state and Ohio and the Middle West at this point had asked the surviving Native Americans at this point, they wouldn't know, either, who had built them, because they're so old. This was 1,000 years before anything that they knew, ... 1,000 years before their time. They would [have] had nothing but the vaguest legends about them also. ...
He also was influenced … by John Lloyd Stephens' book. ...
In 1841 -- after the Book of Mormon, actually -- there was a publication in New York and London of a wonderful two-volume work called Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan by John Lloyd Stephens, an American diplomat, and his artist-companion, the British topographical artist Frederick Catherwood, with wonderful illustrations by Catherwood of the Maya ruins. This was the beginning of Maya archaeology, ... and we who worked with the Maya civilization consider Stephens and Catherwood the kind of patron saints of the whole thing.”
(AND MY FAVORITE!)
“There are people at FARMS [Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies] who believe important archaeological discoveries are in the making. These are very intelligent people. What is it they are resting their hopes on?
To make Book of Mormon archaeology at all kind of believable, my friend John Sorenson has gone this route: He has compared, in a general way, the civilizations of Mexico and Mesoamerica with the civilizations of the western part of the Old World, and he has made a study of how diffusion happens, really very good diffusion studies. He's tried to build a reasonable picture that these two civilizations weren't all that different from each other. Well, this is true of all civilizations, actually; there's nothing new under the sun.
So he has built up what he hopes is a convincing background in which you can put Book of Mormon archaeology, and he's a very serious, bright guy. But I'm sorry to say that I don't really buy more than a part of this.
I don't really think you can argue, no matter how bright you are, that what's said in the Book of Mormon applies to the peoples that we study in Mexico and Central America. That's one way of doing it -- to build up a kind of convincing background, a kind of stage set to this -- but there's no actors. That's the problem....”
So you can be smart and hold to your personal delusions at the same time.
Mormon apologetic assertions about evidence for the BOM are not published outside of the mormon bubble. There is a reason for this. It would be like publishing a paper on the reality of a flat earth or middle earth. FAIR, FARMS, MADD or whatever or whomever they call themselves can never venture outside the playhouse. Mormon apologists have nothing for evidence except “plausible conjecture”.
Here is the link for the interview. It is fantastic.
I wish all to receive it.
http://www.pbs.org/mormons/interviews/coe.html
HIGHLIGHTS
Coe's opinion of Joseph Smith
Why Joseph Smith believed the Book of Mormon took place in Central America
The challenges facing Mormon archaeologists attempting to prove the Book of Mormon
Excerpts:
“Coe is the Charles J. MacCurdy professor emeritus of Anthropology at Yale University and curator emeritus of the Division of Anthropology at the school's Peabody Museum of Natural History. He is an expert on the Maya, who inhabited the same part of Mexico and Central American where Mormon scholars say the events of the Book of Mormon took place. In this interview, Coe discusses the challenges facing Mormon archaeologists attempting to prove the historical truth of their central scripture and his own views on Joseph Smith. This is an edited transcript of an interview conducted May 16, 2006.”
“... The 19th century and the passion for archaeology, the questions that were being asked: Locate Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon in that world.
The world that Joseph Smith lived in, in upstate New York, the so-called Burned-Over District, where all of these new religions were popping up, was one where there were vestiges of ancient Americans -- I mean, real archaeological sites with mounds -- and these were found all through the area that he traveled through; in Ohio especially, incredible mound sites. We could now know what cultures they belong to. In his day, ... the theory was, among most white Americans, that this had nothing to do with the American Indians that they saw around them, that they were made by other races who had come over. There are all sorts of theories: They could be Jews or Welshmen or Vikings or what have you [who] had made those mounds. ...
Of course the basis of it is totally racist -- the idea that Native Americans, the dark-skinned people, could not do this by themselves, and it had to be light-skinned people. That's very much part of what was in Smith's mind at that time. So it was no surprise that he came up with this idea that the Angel Moroni had come to him and told him about these ancient Nephites and Lamanites and Jaredites and so forth. It was all kind of pre-adapted; he was pre-adapted to this, let's say. ...”
“Aren't these natural questions for people who are maybe a generation or two from Europe?
If these people who were living in New York state and Ohio and the Middle West at this point had asked the surviving Native Americans at this point, they wouldn't know, either, who had built them, because they're so old. This was 1,000 years before anything that they knew, ... 1,000 years before their time. They would [have] had nothing but the vaguest legends about them also. ...
He also was influenced … by John Lloyd Stephens' book. ...
In 1841 -- after the Book of Mormon, actually -- there was a publication in New York and London of a wonderful two-volume work called Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan by John Lloyd Stephens, an American diplomat, and his artist-companion, the British topographical artist Frederick Catherwood, with wonderful illustrations by Catherwood of the Maya ruins. This was the beginning of Maya archaeology, ... and we who worked with the Maya civilization consider Stephens and Catherwood the kind of patron saints of the whole thing.”
(AND MY FAVORITE!)
“There are people at FARMS [Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies] who believe important archaeological discoveries are in the making. These are very intelligent people. What is it they are resting their hopes on?
To make Book of Mormon archaeology at all kind of believable, my friend John Sorenson has gone this route: He has compared, in a general way, the civilizations of Mexico and Mesoamerica with the civilizations of the western part of the Old World, and he has made a study of how diffusion happens, really very good diffusion studies. He's tried to build a reasonable picture that these two civilizations weren't all that different from each other. Well, this is true of all civilizations, actually; there's nothing new under the sun.
So he has built up what he hopes is a convincing background in which you can put Book of Mormon archaeology, and he's a very serious, bright guy. But I'm sorry to say that I don't really buy more than a part of this.
I don't really think you can argue, no matter how bright you are, that what's said in the Book of Mormon applies to the peoples that we study in Mexico and Central America. That's one way of doing it -- to build up a kind of convincing background, a kind of stage set to this -- but there's no actors. That's the problem....”
So you can be smart and hold to your personal delusions at the same time.
Calling their conjecture "plausible" is stretching it a bit, isn't it? Hell, even calling it "conjecture" suggests they actually had some factual basis from which they derived their crap, when all they did was what apologetics do: Work backwards from a conclusion and reject all evidence that doesn't fit their conclusion.
I have a YouTube video called "Archaeological Proofs of the Book of Mormon" which has 2300 comments. I get all kinds of nonsense. Here is a sample
None suggest that it is outrageous that we haven't found "one" artifact from that very large group who undoubtedly must have left things behind, including "dead and buried" bodies but nothing! No chariots found in the "Red Sea" where Egyptians would surely have died while trying to follow Moses. No record of Joseph in Egypt or Mt. Sanai location either!
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• So what you're really saying is that we shouldn't dismiss LDS Inc because Christianity is also full of shit??
I guess we should all believe in Santa because the tooth fairy and Easter Bunny stories are equally as troubling and lacking evidence.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
I didn't say that. You did.
I'm saying that we have faith, that even though not much archeology has turned up from the great Exodus of 500k people of Israel, that doesn't make their journey less true.
You don't have faith in either so I wish you'd just admit that you believe there is no God.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• THELDSLIFE Very few people believe in a historic Bible. Most Christians believe in the message and the teachings. People who believe in literal scriptures, whether Christan, Mormon or Islam are called fundamentalists. Look it up. It doesn't really matter if the Mosaic exodus is true. It is about the message. Now, Mormons believe and claim everything is literal (fundamentalists). It is very easy to prove Mormonism false based on their own scriptures. It is really a no brainer.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• Now - THELDSLIFE, Think about what you call fundamentalists. You claim it is some other group that believes in what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young actually taught. It is really you. You are a fundamentalist by the accepted definition. You are EXACTLY the same as the polyg fundamentalists.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• Do you understand the difference between faith and delusion???
Evidence of 500k people leaving Egypt and sticking around in the area for FORTY years would leave lots of evidence. Just like millions of people with tech. that rivaled the Roman empire, could not possibly completely disappear. Esp. in light of an organization with a PROPHET that should know where to look.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
I absolutely do.
Faith is hope for things which are not seen but are true. Jesus Christ himself said this unto Thomas, "...because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. "
Not all would gaze upon the resurrected Savior in order to believe. Centuries later, there are few who have seen the risen Lord but there be many who still believe, regardless of Archeological evidence.
It is essential to the plan to walk by some faith.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Lol, I see you failed to even give a definition of delusion. LDS Inc and literal christianity have been disproved in literally thousands of different ways. I really don't know how much more obvious this needs to get.
Why do you keep resorting to using circular reasoning? Is it because your argument folds like a cheap tent?
More than a billion people believe in Muhammad and Allah. That doesn't mean they're not deluded. Oh, and that which is asserted without evidence can be summarily dismissed.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
Why don't you just come out and say you're a godless atheist who should also have the same opinion of any other prophet who received revelation from God. ie, Moses, Isaiah, etc.
This isn't a "your idea vs LDS..."
It's You vs God in general and how he couldn't possible reveal or instruct men during any dispensation. Quit making it your idealology vs LDS. You don't claim ownership of God through divine nature and act as a lone voice along with your atheist colleagues.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Yes, I'm an atheist and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I know of no one that has received any divine revelation that has ever held up to scrutiny.
"god in general?" LOL, I'm against all of the thousands of gods that man has made for himself. When did I "claim ownership of god?"
Actually, it is my ideology vs LDS Inc. It's empirical truth vs. bronze age tribal myths and con artists.
fubecabr 1 year ago
There were a million people in that war. However, in the BIBLE we have a couple million (Children of Israel) cross the Red Sea and go into the local wilderness there for 40 years. However, we have no evidence for ANY of that. No skeletons. No chariots of Egyptians in the sea, no horses drowned, no Egyptians drowned.
Maybe the "standard" of evidence for the Book of Mormon is set much much much much higher than that of the Bible...? Just saying.
mormonanswerman 1 year ago 2
• I don't believe in a literal Bible, but at least there is a Red Sea and a Jerusalem. That is more than the Mormons have. Most Christians have let go of a literal Bible. The best current evidence is that the Old Testament was written in the 7th century BC. I accept that as reasonable. Mormons however hold to a literal interpretation of the Book of Mormon. That is the higher standard. It is either a literal interpretation or not. So who is full of baloney, Sparky?
jhuston7 1 year ago
I concur with Grant... (Mormonanswerman)
There is no record of a Joseph in Egypt except in the account of Moses... no direct evidence of the children of Israel, numbered in the tens of thousands... and out of the 20 possible locations for Mount Sanai, none have come out and declared one of them that, "This is it!"
There are some who even suggest that the body of Jesus Christ was stolen from the tomb so where does Faith fit in?
It has to be the primary source or all else fails.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Your faith causes you to reject scientific evidence, just like faith in the middle ages caused people to reject Newton and continue to believe in a flat earth. It causes you to put your fingers in your ears and scream LALALALALA so you can't hear the truth being discovered around you. Your "faith" is a deterrent to the acceptance of knowledge. Why do I need to believe Joseph was in Egypt? How does that help me? Why must I believe Christ was not stolen from the tomb?
jhuston7 1 year ago
• 'Don't matter! A god who can snap his holy fingers and make a universe. surely isn't into man's goofy holy stories about what he does. For Christ sake THINK. Your dead brain cells ain't gonna behold any paradise no matter what kind of holy/hustle crap you've been sold. My favorite is Veronica Lueken's "Our lady of the roses" thing in Bayside NY It out shines Joseph Smith's visits by Jesus. It used to be Jonestown by those holy freaks wanted me to drink poison.
JCPUTT 1 year ago
• @JCPUTT
No one said that God waved a magic wand to help in creating the earth. No one said that this creative period lasted 6 earth days... 6000 years... or even 6 million years. It just says they called it the "First Day" for each creative period. There is evidence that the earth wasn't
even created in this solar system... having itself been placed in its orbit a mere 6 thousand years ago This earth is not made up of the same stuff as its neighboring planets.
Support for creation is growing.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• The Doctrine and Covenants chapter 77 explains that the creative days were 1000 years each. This has been reiterated in the Discourses of Brigham Young (p258), Journal of Discourses (25:9, 6:307, 8:2, 12:271, 14:5, 14:234, 15:263, 21:202) it is also in the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (section 5 p 252). It has also been the topic of talks and Ensign articles and in books by George Q. Cannon, Joseph Fielding Smith, Boyd K. Packer, Bruce R. McConkie and Ezra Taft Benson.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• OK! I'll try to translate:
You suspect that God made this beautiful planet earth as a separate special globe completely different from all other orbs that were already occupying our universe. And the guy put it here orbiting the sun 6,000 yrs. ago? No I'll not argue. Nor should you deny my suspicions after having observed and studied human philosophy and religion for over 50 years.
"Lord what fools ye mortals be" Shakespeare from "Midsummer
Nights Dream"
JCPUTT 1 year ago
None suggest that it is outrageous that we haven't found "one" artifact from that very large group who undoubtedly must have left things behind, including "dead and buried" bodies but nothing! No chariots found in the "Red Sea" where Egyptians would surely have died while trying to follow Moses. No record of Joseph in Egypt or Mt. Sanai location either!
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• So what you're really saying is that we shouldn't dismiss LDS Inc because Christianity is also full of shit??
I guess we should all believe in Santa because the tooth fairy and Easter Bunny stories are equally as troubling and lacking evidence.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
I didn't say that. You did.
I'm saying that we have faith, that even though not much archeology has turned up from the great Exodus of 500k people of Israel, that doesn't make their journey less true.
You don't have faith in either so I wish you'd just admit that you believe there is no God.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• THELDSLIFE Very few people believe in a historic Bible. Most Christians believe in the message and the teachings. People who believe in literal scriptures, whether Christan, Mormon or Islam are called fundamentalists. Look it up. It doesn't really matter if the Mosaic exodus is true. It is about the message. Now, Mormons believe and claim everything is literal (fundamentalists). It is very easy to prove Mormonism false based on their own scriptures. It is really a no brainer.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• Now - THELDSLIFE, Think about what you call fundamentalists. You claim it is some other group that believes in what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young actually taught. It is really you. You are a fundamentalist by the accepted definition. You are EXACTLY the same as the polyg fundamentalists.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• Do you understand the difference between faith and delusion???
Evidence of 500k people leaving Egypt and sticking around in the area for FORTY years would leave lots of evidence. Just like millions of people with tech. that rivaled the Roman empire, could not possibly completely disappear. Esp. in light of an organization with a PROPHET that should know where to look.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
I absolutely do.
Faith is hope for things which are not seen but are true. Jesus Christ himself said this unto Thomas, "...because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. "
Not all would gaze upon the resurrected Savior in order to believe. Centuries later, there are few who have seen the risen Lord but there be many who still believe, regardless of Archeological evidence.
It is essential to the plan to walk by some faith.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Lol, I see you failed to even give a definition of delusion. LDS Inc and literal christianity have been disproved in literally thousands of different ways. I really don't know how much more obvious this needs to get.
Why do you keep resorting to using circular reasoning? Is it because your argument folds like a cheap tent?
More than a billion people believe in Muhammad and Allah. That doesn't mean they're not deluded. Oh, and that which is asserted without evidence can be summarily dismissed.
fubecabr 1 year ago
• @fubecabr
Why don't you just come out and say you're a godless atheist who should also have the same opinion of any other prophet who received revelation from God. ie, Moses, Isaiah, etc.
This isn't a "your idea vs LDS..."
It's You vs God in general and how he couldn't possible reveal or instruct men during any dispensation. Quit making it your idealology vs LDS. You don't claim ownership of God through divine nature and act as a lone voice along with your atheist colleagues.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Yes, I'm an atheist and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I know of no one that has received any divine revelation that has ever held up to scrutiny.
"god in general?" LOL, I'm against all of the thousands of gods that man has made for himself. When did I "claim ownership of god?"
Actually, it is my ideology vs LDS Inc. It's empirical truth vs. bronze age tribal myths and con artists.
fubecabr 1 year ago
There were a million people in that war. However, in the BIBLE we have a couple million (Children of Israel) cross the Red Sea and go into the local wilderness there for 40 years. However, we have no evidence for ANY of that. No skeletons. No chariots of Egyptians in the sea, no horses drowned, no Egyptians drowned.
Maybe the "standard" of evidence for the Book of Mormon is set much much much much higher than that of the Bible...? Just saying.
mormonanswerman 1 year ago 2
• I don't believe in a literal Bible, but at least there is a Red Sea and a Jerusalem. That is more than the Mormons have. Most Christians have let go of a literal Bible. The best current evidence is that the Old Testament was written in the 7th century BC. I accept that as reasonable. Mormons however hold to a literal interpretation of the Book of Mormon. That is the higher standard. It is either a literal interpretation or not. So who is full of baloney, Sparky?
jhuston7 1 year ago
I concur with Grant... (Mormonanswerman)
There is no record of a Joseph in Egypt except in the account of Moses... no direct evidence of the children of Israel, numbered in the tens of thousands... and out of the 20 possible locations for Mount Sanai, none have come out and declared one of them that, "This is it!"
There are some who even suggest that the body of Jesus Christ was stolen from the tomb so where does Faith fit in?
It has to be the primary source or all else fails.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• Your faith causes you to reject scientific evidence, just like faith in the middle ages caused people to reject Newton and continue to believe in a flat earth. It causes you to put your fingers in your ears and scream LALALALALA so you can't hear the truth being discovered around you. Your "faith" is a deterrent to the acceptance of knowledge. Why do I need to believe Joseph was in Egypt? How does that help me? Why must I believe Christ was not stolen from the tomb?
jhuston7 1 year ago
• 'Don't matter! A god who can snap his holy fingers and make a universe. surely isn't into man's goofy holy stories about what he does. For Christ sake THINK. Your dead brain cells ain't gonna behold any paradise no matter what kind of holy/hustle crap you've been sold. My favorite is Veronica Lueken's "Our lady of the roses" thing in Bayside NY It out shines Joseph Smith's visits by Jesus. It used to be Jonestown by those holy freaks wanted me to drink poison.
JCPUTT 1 year ago
• @JCPUTT
No one said that God waved a magic wand to help in creating the earth. No one said that this creative period lasted 6 earth days... 6000 years... or even 6 million years. It just says they called it the "First Day" for each creative period. There is evidence that the earth wasn't
even created in this solar system... having itself been placed in its orbit a mere 6 thousand years ago This earth is not made up of the same stuff as its neighboring planets.
Support for creation is growing.
THELDSLIFE 1 year ago
• The Doctrine and Covenants chapter 77 explains that the creative days were 1000 years each. This has been reiterated in the Discourses of Brigham Young (p258), Journal of Discourses (25:9, 6:307, 8:2, 12:271, 14:5, 14:234, 15:263, 21:202) it is also in the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (section 5 p 252). It has also been the topic of talks and Ensign articles and in books by George Q. Cannon, Joseph Fielding Smith, Boyd K. Packer, Bruce R. McConkie and Ezra Taft Benson.
jhuston7 1 year ago
• OK! I'll try to translate:
You suspect that God made this beautiful planet earth as a separate special globe completely different from all other orbs that were already occupying our universe. And the guy put it here orbiting the sun 6,000 yrs. ago? No I'll not argue. Nor should you deny my suspicions after having observed and studied human philosophy and religion for over 50 years.
"Lord what fools ye mortals be" Shakespeare from "Midsummer
Nights Dream"
JCPUTT 1 year ago
There was a whole lotta stupid packed in those YouTube comments but I think my favorite one is:
<<There is evidence that the earth wasn't
even created in this solar system... having itself been placed in its orbit a mere 6 thousand years ago This earth is not made up of the same stuff as its neighboring planets.
Support for creation is growing.>>
That comment should get some kind of special dumb-ass award.
<<There is evidence that the earth wasn't
even created in this solar system... having itself been placed in its orbit a mere 6 thousand years ago This earth is not made up of the same stuff as its neighboring planets.
Support for creation is growing.>>
That comment should get some kind of special dumb-ass award.
You asked, "how on earth does TSCC get away with such unquestioning membership on the whole?"
I like to say that mormons are intellectually lazy, and rely on the good word from church leaders. (Some think that is too harsh of an assessment.)
But it falls under "the thinking has been done" category. When one already believes, all it takes is a few real/imagined facts and voila, truth! Being convinced that any negative comments are from the devil certainly keeps the illusion alive. And, every once in a while the Ensign magazine (etc) will throw a few tidbits that way to keep the believers believing.
My dear old mum has been on one of those "book of mormon" tours, and wouldn't for a moment consider the BofM to be a fabrication.
I like to say that mormons are intellectually lazy, and rely on the good word from church leaders. (Some think that is too harsh of an assessment.)
But it falls under "the thinking has been done" category. When one already believes, all it takes is a few real/imagined facts and voila, truth! Being convinced that any negative comments are from the devil certainly keeps the illusion alive. And, every once in a while the Ensign magazine (etc) will throw a few tidbits that way to keep the believers believing.
My dear old mum has been on one of those "book of mormon" tours, and wouldn't for a moment consider the BofM to be a fabrication.
TBMs will believe anything from other LDS members. If an apologist has academic credentials it must be as good as gospel.
Maybe LDS members do not realize how sloppy and sometimes dishonest the scholars are.
Here is an example. Just watch the first few seconds of this video about horses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkydMSmv1Zo#t=0m50s
Over at FAIR, they admit that the horse skull is a hoax:
http://fi.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Animals
(scroll down to video)
"Please note that reference is made to a potential pre-Columbian horse, the so-called "Spencer Lake," horse skull. This has now been determined to have been a fraud or hoax, and should not be considered evidence for the Book of Mormon account."
Funny how FAIR says "This has now been determined..."
That horse skull was known to be a hoax in 1964. Why would LDS scholars be so sloppy in making a claim based on a known hoax? The hoax had been exposed decades ago. Why would the apologists claim "This has now been determined"?
Here is a link to the 1964 Wisconsin Archaeologist publication that exposed the hoax:
http://www.archive.org/stream/wisconsinarcheol44wiscrich#page/n367/mode/2up
Here is another link about the Spencer Lake horse hoax:
http://archaeology.about.com/od/frauds/a/spencer_lake.htm
TBMs are pacified if they are told there is in an answer on the internet. Maybe they don't realize or don't want to know that apologists are giving sloppy and sometimes deceptive answers.
Maybe LDS members do not realize how sloppy and sometimes dishonest the scholars are.
Here is an example. Just watch the first few seconds of this video about horses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkydMSmv1Zo#t=0m50s
Over at FAIR, they admit that the horse skull is a hoax:
http://fi.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Animals
(scroll down to video)
"Please note that reference is made to a potential pre-Columbian horse, the so-called "Spencer Lake," horse skull. This has now been determined to have been a fraud or hoax, and should not be considered evidence for the Book of Mormon account."
Funny how FAIR says "This has now been determined..."
That horse skull was known to be a hoax in 1964. Why would LDS scholars be so sloppy in making a claim based on a known hoax? The hoax had been exposed decades ago. Why would the apologists claim "This has now been determined"?
Here is a link to the 1964 Wisconsin Archaeologist publication that exposed the hoax:
http://www.archive.org/stream/wisconsinarcheol44wiscrich#page/n367/mode/2up
Here is another link about the Spencer Lake horse hoax:
http://archaeology.about.com/od/frauds/a/spencer_lake.htm
TBMs are pacified if they are told there is in an answer on the internet. Maybe they don't realize or don't want to know that apologists are giving sloppy and sometimes deceptive answers.
Their gramma and grandpa told 'em so...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 04:08PM by SL Cabbie.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 04:08PM by SL Cabbie.
"It is the personal opinion of the writer that the Lord does not intend that the Book of Mormon, at least at the present time, shall be proved true by any archaeological findings. They day may come when such will be the case, but not now. The Book of Mormon is itself a witness of the truth, and the promise has been given most solemnly that any person who will read it with a prayerful heart may receive the abiding testimony of its truth.”
- Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 1998, v. 2, p. 196
---------------------------
“... our testimony of the Book of Mormon remain[s] a matter of faith, and [is] not based upon external proofs found from archaeology.”
- Duane R. Aston, Return to Cumorah, 1998
------------------------
There, you see? If you had faith, you would not need the BoM evidence. You DO have faith, don't you?
Good- cuz we'd sure hate to see you lose your blessings...
- Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 1998, v. 2, p. 196
---------------------------
“... our testimony of the Book of Mormon remain[s] a matter of faith, and [is] not based upon external proofs found from archaeology.”
- Duane R. Aston, Return to Cumorah, 1998
------------------------
There, you see? If you had faith, you would not need the BoM evidence. You DO have faith, don't you?
Good- cuz we'd sure hate to see you lose your blessings...
A quick reality check:
- It's one thing for God (should he/she/it exist) to test billions to see if they will on the whole lead generally good or bad lives.
- It's another to expect them to locate an obscure and quirky church as the one and only path back.
- It's something else completely to expect them to find this obscure church and ignore a complete lack of any external proof in a book that supposedly is the keystone of the religion... in fact we have to accept the word of a man that claims to talk on Gods's behalf that he has purposefully made it impossible for anyone to find any proof, just to make the reliance on blind faith all the more critical.
yeah right!
- It's one thing for God (should he/she/it exist) to test billions to see if they will on the whole lead generally good or bad lives.
- It's another to expect them to locate an obscure and quirky church as the one and only path back.
- It's something else completely to expect them to find this obscure church and ignore a complete lack of any external proof in a book that supposedly is the keystone of the religion... in fact we have to accept the word of a man that claims to talk on Gods's behalf that he has purposefully made it impossible for anyone to find any proof, just to make the reliance on blind faith all the more critical.
yeah right!
Sorry, but taking quotes from someone who has a stake in people believing their crap is nowhere near a credible argument for Mormonism.
You wouldn't believe a fraud who took $500,000 from you at his word, would you?
It's awfully convenient when the very leader and the man who has the most to lose if the church fails suddenly has a revelation that states that Gawd told him there would never be evidence of the BoM. TBMs swallow it as actual revelation, exmos and nonmos see it as covering their ass when science advances to the point it can disprove him.
Anything to keep getting 10% of the TBM's money
You wouldn't believe a fraud who took $500,000 from you at his word, would you?
It's awfully convenient when the very leader and the man who has the most to lose if the church fails suddenly has a revelation that states that Gawd told him there would never be evidence of the BoM. TBMs swallow it as actual revelation, exmos and nonmos see it as covering their ass when science advances to the point it can disprove him.
Anything to keep getting 10% of the TBM's money
does not require archeology evidences. It's sufficient to believe (that powerful spiritual witness) that anything seen by a spiritual eye is as valid as any other claim.
That's how it works, folks, in almost every single religion there is or ever will be.
That's how it works, folks, in almost every single religion there is or ever will be.
Don't they have BOM archaeology tours? For the average member, that alone is enough to prove that the archaeology exists.
Now you mention it, I do remember hearing about these Lillium. What on earth do they show people on these? C'mon, anyone been on one of these or know anyone that has?
False infomation and miss information. They beleve there is evidance.
Most TBMs don't have time to think let alone ponder the issues that the lack of archealogy presents. Just think about the way the church keeps those drones busy. And I mean they are so burdened down with "callings" and other church responsibilities they don't have much time to investigate the doubts that are floating around in their heads. Most of them paralize any efforts to see beyond lds.org or lds opologists rebuts because of the indoctrination of guilt that is cramed into their brains. The control that is excercised over them is just staggering. Think about all those TBMs that have died and been buried in their goofy bakers outfits never even knowing the truth about all this? It just pisses me off to know end!!
Well, the TBM I work with says that G-d wants a people who have faith and he values those that have faith the things described in the BoM or G-d apparently told Joseph et al happened.
I asked if that was current church teaching because of the complete absence of any verifiable evidence for anything claimed by Joseph. As some of the claims are so patently ridiculous (seer stone in a hat - come on!) the only way people will believe it is if they've been convinced that it's some bizarre test of faith by G-d.
I asked if that was current church teaching because of the complete absence of any verifiable evidence for anything claimed by Joseph. As some of the claims are so patently ridiculous (seer stone in a hat - come on!) the only way people will believe it is if they've been convinced that it's some bizarre test of faith by G-d.
There are lots of BOM archeology tours to Guatemala and Southern Mexico. They basically show people the Mayan and Aztec ruins and portray them as Nephite. There's not much science to it.
Wow that's such a con. What kind of charlatans are running these things under such false pretence.
Why would you expect people, who think it's okay to give 10% of their income to a Church that spends 75 times more on a shopping mall in SLC than on humanitarian aid, to worry about the lack of physical back up to the claims about the Book of Mormon?
(I notice that I have been sadly lacking in my punctuational responsibilities during that last paragraph...)
(I notice that I have been sadly lacking in my punctuational responsibilities during that last paragraph...)
The vast majority of Mormons are not even aware of the conflicts in BoM archeology (add metallurgy, zoology, anthropology, and several other "ologies"), much less concerned enough to question it.
If the curiosity of average rank-and-file Mormon ever rises to the level of concern, they will be just as satisfied with an (Ashinine) apology as they once were with the story.
A few skeptics and intellectuals will find themselves unable to resolve the conflicts and they will leave the church.
There are some who know that it's a bunch of crap but have to stay with the program to keep their family and social network from splitting apart.
And, the Mormon royalty are financially invested. Regardless of what they believe, they're in it for the benefits.
If the curiosity of average rank-and-file Mormon ever rises to the level of concern, they will be just as satisfied with an (Ashinine) apology as they once were with the story.
A few skeptics and intellectuals will find themselves unable to resolve the conflicts and they will leave the church.
There are some who know that it's a bunch of crap but have to stay with the program to keep their family and social network from splitting apart.
And, the Mormon royalty are financially invested. Regardless of what they believe, they're in it for the benefits.
Because when they start questioning the distinct lack of any BoM archeology, they cease being TBMs.
TBM's are complete idiots.
They don't question it for the same reason that most Christians don't question whether or not Jesus could have really cured blind people. It is something to believe, not to question.
Because they're jackass Morgbots and brainwashed.
They think that lots of evidence exists, yes including stuff which we know to be Aztec or Mayan. They also believe that the dense jungle has covered up a lot of evidence, which actually it has. Unfortunately, none of it is Nephite or Lamanite, but they won't believe that.
Actually there is tons of evidence for the Book of Mormon people. There are whole books written on it. I have read 2 and they are very convincing.
I do want to point out a falasy concerning the scientific approach. Lack of evidence is not evidence. Just because scientists have found absolutely no evidence of walls around Jericho does not make it so.
The other thing is that knowledge of the Book of Mormon must be received through revelation from God himself because the philosophies of men are terribly divided. When a person receives knowledge from God, it is spoken directly to his soul in such a way that the person understands with his whole being. It is like the eyes of his understanding have been opened. Once a person has received this, it does not really matter what man has to say.
I do want to point out a falasy concerning the scientific approach. Lack of evidence is not evidence. Just because scientists have found absolutely no evidence of walls around Jericho does not make it so.
The other thing is that knowledge of the Book of Mormon must be received through revelation from God himself because the philosophies of men are terribly divided. When a person receives knowledge from God, it is spoken directly to his soul in such a way that the person understands with his whole being. It is like the eyes of his understanding have been opened. Once a person has received this, it does not really matter what man has to say.
peter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually there is tons of evidence for the Book of
> Mormon people. There are whole books written on
> it. I have read 2 and they are very convincing.
>
What books? Who wrote them? If they were Mormon apologetics, try again. There are gobs of books that contradict pretty much every sad claim Mormon apologetics make about archeology at this point.
> I do want to point out a falasy concerning the
> scientific approach. Lack of evidence is not
> evidence. Just because scientists have found
> absolutely no evidence of walls around Jericho
> does not make it so.
>
First off, that's not something scientists rely upon.
Second off, scientists can and often do make logical claims based on a complete and consistent LACK of evidence. If you say there's beer in my fridge and I see none in there, yet you continue to claim it despite me never seeing a drop in there, then then it is extremely likely there's no beer in the damn fridge.
Third, pointing out that we see a lack of evidence doesn't prove the validity of Mormonism one bit. The lack of evidence only makes the validity of Mormonism that much less credible.
Finally, we're not going purely off of a lack of evidence. We have tons of evidence that contradicts basically every "fact" Mormonism can come up with, as well as its apologetics. DNA, experts, testing, science, science, SCIENCE. Sure, maybe a lack of evidence is not an evidence of absence, but consistent and verified contradicting evidence sure is.
> The other thing is that knowledge of the Book of
> Mormon must be received through revelation from
> God himself because the philosophies of men are
> terribly divided. When a person receives knowledge
> from God, it is spoken directly to his soul in
> such a way that the person understands with his
> whole being. It is like the eyes of his
> understanding have been opened. Once a person has
> received this, it does not really matter what man
> has to say.
Oh yay! Now for your own logical fallacy:
1. I can't prove what I think I know.
2. But I get warm fuzzies about it and think GodDidIt.
3. Therefore, Mormonism is true.
Sorry, but the REAL WORLD does not work that way.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually there is tons of evidence for the Book of
> Mormon people. There are whole books written on
> it. I have read 2 and they are very convincing.
>
What books? Who wrote them? If they were Mormon apologetics, try again. There are gobs of books that contradict pretty much every sad claim Mormon apologetics make about archeology at this point.
> I do want to point out a falasy concerning the
> scientific approach. Lack of evidence is not
> evidence. Just because scientists have found
> absolutely no evidence of walls around Jericho
> does not make it so.
>
First off, that's not something scientists rely upon.
Second off, scientists can and often do make logical claims based on a complete and consistent LACK of evidence. If you say there's beer in my fridge and I see none in there, yet you continue to claim it despite me never seeing a drop in there, then then it is extremely likely there's no beer in the damn fridge.
Third, pointing out that we see a lack of evidence doesn't prove the validity of Mormonism one bit. The lack of evidence only makes the validity of Mormonism that much less credible.
Finally, we're not going purely off of a lack of evidence. We have tons of evidence that contradicts basically every "fact" Mormonism can come up with, as well as its apologetics. DNA, experts, testing, science, science, SCIENCE. Sure, maybe a lack of evidence is not an evidence of absence, but consistent and verified contradicting evidence sure is.
> The other thing is that knowledge of the Book of
> Mormon must be received through revelation from
> God himself because the philosophies of men are
> terribly divided. When a person receives knowledge
> from God, it is spoken directly to his soul in
> such a way that the person understands with his
> whole being. It is like the eyes of his
> understanding have been opened. Once a person has
> received this, it does not really matter what man
> has to say.
Oh yay! Now for your own logical fallacy:
1. I can't prove what I think I know.
2. But I get warm fuzzies about it and think GodDidIt.
3. Therefore, Mormonism is true.
Sorry, but the REAL WORLD does not work that way.
I should add, a lack of evidence can carry considerable credibility when certain conditions are made. Let's stay within the context of claims made by the Book of Mormon AND apologetics:
1. The biggest problematic claim, actually, is that the fictional BoM peoples controlled basically the entirety of BOTH American continents.
2. Next gaping flaw in the claim: That these fictional peoples have technology that wasn't even around in the heart of Europe, something that has been verified to have been the most technologically advanced area of the world. Apparently the Lamanites and the Nephites had steel. Lets just stop on steel for now.
3. Final flaw we'll examine: The claim of animals that didn't even exist in the Americas at the time of the BoM's fictional events. Let's just focus on horses.
Now, IF THESE THINGS WERE TRUE, claim 1 would make it pretty much impossible for an archaeologist to NOT dig up their cities, or their steel. Biologists would be finding fossils of horses ALL OVER the Americas.
Now, here's the problem. They haven't. They never did. In fact, what they HAVE dug up and also already had known from previous historical accounts was that there were dozens of COMPLETELY UNRELATED civilizations all over instead. Not only that, none of them were even close to the tech level of European society. No steel. No horses.
Even later, DNA testing has disproven that there was any middle-eastern blood in any of those cultures, or in any of the native cultures still surviving today.
Scientists instead found that the Americas were populated over the Bering strait, a land bridge that crossed over nowhere near Israel, by people native to areas completely cut off from the middle east, geographically. Oops.
1. The biggest problematic claim, actually, is that the fictional BoM peoples controlled basically the entirety of BOTH American continents.
2. Next gaping flaw in the claim: That these fictional peoples have technology that wasn't even around in the heart of Europe, something that has been verified to have been the most technologically advanced area of the world. Apparently the Lamanites and the Nephites had steel. Lets just stop on steel for now.
3. Final flaw we'll examine: The claim of animals that didn't even exist in the Americas at the time of the BoM's fictional events. Let's just focus on horses.
Now, IF THESE THINGS WERE TRUE, claim 1 would make it pretty much impossible for an archaeologist to NOT dig up their cities, or their steel. Biologists would be finding fossils of horses ALL OVER the Americas.
Now, here's the problem. They haven't. They never did. In fact, what they HAVE dug up and also already had known from previous historical accounts was that there were dozens of COMPLETELY UNRELATED civilizations all over instead. Not only that, none of them were even close to the tech level of European society. No steel. No horses.
Even later, DNA testing has disproven that there was any middle-eastern blood in any of those cultures, or in any of the native cultures still surviving today.
Scientists instead found that the Americas were populated over the Bering strait, a land bridge that crossed over nowhere near Israel, by people native to areas completely cut off from the middle east, geographically. Oops.
Then you must ask which of the Latter-Day churches to join.
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches contrary to the LDS/FLDS view of God, afterlife, Polygamy/celestial marriage, and of the gospel itself where Jesus teaches the surviving Nephites that any gospel beyond what he has taught them is of the devil.
In fact, if you do receive a sure witness of the Book of Mormon you should check out:
Community of Christ/RLDS
RLDS conservative offshoots
Church of Christ (temple lot)
Church of Jesus Christ.
But whether the LDS church is true is dependent upon the Book of Abraham, King Follett Discourse and the D&C after 120, excluding 137. Its truth cannot be verified by the Book of Mormon.
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches contrary to the LDS/FLDS view of God, afterlife, Polygamy/celestial marriage, and of the gospel itself where Jesus teaches the surviving Nephites that any gospel beyond what he has taught them is of the devil.
In fact, if you do receive a sure witness of the Book of Mormon you should check out:
Community of Christ/RLDS
RLDS conservative offshoots
Church of Christ (temple lot)
Church of Jesus Christ.
But whether the LDS church is true is dependent upon the Book of Abraham, King Follett Discourse and the D&C after 120, excluding 137. Its truth cannot be verified by the Book of Mormon.
If I'm sitting in a Ford, and pray, then receive knowledge from God that I am actually sitting a Chevy, what do I do? Did God put all those Ford emblems, engine and bodywork on a Chevy to fool me?
Just sayin', my friend.....
Just sayin', my friend.....
P.S. I think that archeologists found that Jericho did have walls, but they had collapsed and were basically gone hundreds of years before Joshua showed up with his big band.
But I would love to read up on more info.
But I would love to read up on more info.
They just convince themselves that Incan/Mayan/Whatever sites dug up are Lamanite/Nephite sites and go about their merry way. I'm pretty sure FAIR and FARMS both try to make that claim.
Because they don't want to.
Ron
Ron
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed. Please start another thread and continue the conversation.