Melchizedek

Into the Night said:
Yes, actually. It seems to consist of several rather disconnected bits of history, in much the same way the Bible does.
Like the Bible, it discusses Christ and God, and provides good counsel.
Click to expand...

I would say it is YOU that has not read the Book of Mormon, since you seem to think it's some kind of novel.
 
Into the Night said:
Yes, actually. It seems to consist of several rather disconnected bits of history, in much the same way the Bible does.
Like the Bible, it discusses Christ and God, and provides good counsel.
Click to expand...
Most of those people have any historical evidence they ever existed in the Book or Mormon
 
Mason 22 said:
Most of those people have any historical evidence they ever existed in the Book or Mormon
Click to expand...
Argument of the Stone fallacy. Denial of self reference fallacy. Math errors: failure to declare boundary. Failure to declare boundary. Failure to declare data.

Attempted proof by negative identity.
 
Into the Night said:
Yes, actually. It seems to consist of several rather disconnected bits of history, in much the same way the Bible does.
Like the Bible, it discusses Christ and God, and provides good counsel.
Click to expand...
I liked the time when Joseph Smith bought a scrap of ancient Egyptian papyrus and "translated" it (but never published it). Supposedly he thought it contained stuff it turned out to be completely unrelated to. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri)

I must say I am fascinated by the Mormon religion since it is a great case where something is just young enough for us to all see the likely real manipulations and fabrications, but it's old enough that the religion has become well-established so there are people who actually believe it.

I see religion kind of like an evolutionary process. Once a religion gets established and maintains itself for a few centuries suddenly it is quite easy to overlook the "weirdnesses" of the source material, or even the possibility that it could be mostly "made up".
 
Mason 22 said:
Whatever
Click to expand...

Into seldom has ANY valuable content and debating or discussing a point with them is pretty much guaranteed to be useless. Occasionally you can hit Into at a point when he's posting something with minor content but don't hope for it to last. Ultimately he'll resort to these silly posts.
 
Obtenebrator said:
I liked the time when Joseph Smith bought a scrap of ancient Egyptian papyrus and "translated" it (but never published it). Supposedly he thought it contained stuff it turned out to be completely unrelated to. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri)

I must say I am fascinated by the Mormon religion since it is a great case where something is just young enough for us to all see the likely real manipulations and fabrications, but it's old enough that the religion has become well-established so there are people who actually believe it.

I see religion kind of like an evolutionary process. Once a religion gets established and maintains itself for a few centuries suddenly it is quite easy to overlook the "weirdnesses" of the source material, or even the possibility that it could be mostly "made up".
Click to expand...
People still say the same thing about the Bible.
So what else is new? There will always be people that reject them.
 
Obtenebrator said:
Into seldom has ANY valuable content and debating or discussing a point with them is pretty much guaranteed to be useless. Occasionally you can hit Into at a point when he's posting something with minor content but don't hope for it to last. Ultimately he'll resort to these silly posts.
Click to expand...
DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEM ON ME OR ANYBODY ELSE, SYBIL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top