• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do you actually *appreciate* the Book of Mormon?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Before 1960 or so, that would've been the general consensus about the Vikings as well. Yet today, look what we have: L'Anse aux Meadows - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, that is exactly what Im talking about.

As is Jesus rising from the dead, or Jesus appearing before the disciples.
Look buddy, Im not a Christian, I dont give a **** about that, I already know its pure crap.

The ten plagues of Egypt would probably work well in a sci-fi story, too.
Yes, but at least we respect it as a tradition and not as history.


Out of curiosity, what details did Joseph Smith get wrong?
Well, tell me, what did he get RIGHT? really, anything?
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
And Jesus Christ is mentioned on practically every page of the Book of Mormon. When you say that "the New Testament focuses on Jesus," I really have to laugh. What else would you expect it to focus on? Look how much of the Old Testament sets the scene for what is found in the New Testament. Why wouldn't the first verse of the New Testament be "perfect in this context"? Jesus Christ isn't even born until well over half of the time span in the Book of Mormon has passed. But His coming is prophesied of as early as on page 2. You are trying to draw comparisons where there is no reason for comparisons to exist.
Yes, and thats what im saying, is there a need to repeat it? there is no comparison between the BoM and the NT, thats what im saying, the BoM is irrelevant to ancient and modern Christianity.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
And that is not what the Book of Mormon claims, Caladan. As a moderator, you should have better taste and more self-control than to post ludicrous comments like that one.
Honestly, why should I? a question is asked, and im giving the brutal and naked honesty. should I say sweet lies about the BoM? most Jews and Christians find it irrelevant to their tradition, and most Jews find it offensive that they are depicted in such a way in it.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Because no one before Colombus or the Vikings arrival to the outskirts of North America have reached the New World, certainly not many centuries ago. if you cannot understand that, no historian will help you, these kind of fantasies will be ripped to shreds in a historical debate.
Excuse me? There were people throughout the Americas long before the arrival of Colombus or the Vikings. Where did they come from?

LOL. no, what you see are actual artifacts, based on actual history and labored to be found by actual archaeologists.
That's what I'm saying. It was nearly a century after Joseph Smith described the plates on which the Book of Mormon was recorded before any of these "actual artifacts" were ever discovered by "actual archaeologists." In Joseph Smith's day, the notion that any ancient people ever recorded their histories on metal plates was considered absolutely ludicrous because no such evidence had ever been found. Why didn't he just claim that he found some papyrus? Wouldn't it have been more believable?

Jesus visiting in America is a nice dose of Sci Fi.
I don't understand why. If He were the Son of God, it would not have been at all impossible. If He was not who He claimed to be, then He was a "nice dose of Sci Fi" Himself.

Really? do share them with us.
Why? So that you might actually reconsider what you've said and withdraw your sarcastic comments?

a book written in the 19th century cannot have much in common with ancient Hebrew texts written in the centuries before the Christian savior, and the Hebrew text about the Christian savior 2000 years ago, it is linguistically impossible and culturally impossible, a 19th century American can have no comprehension of Semitic sacred literature, unless he went to the best universities and studied by Jewish rabbies and scholars, and even then he will have to take his knowledge with a grain of salt.
Amazing that you picked up on that!

Far enough to get a good Jewish giggle.
Well, you're easily amused, aren't you?
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Excuse me? There were people throughout the Americas long before the arrival of Colombus or the Vikings. Where did they come from?
Listen to yourself, everyone knows native people have lived in the Americas for centuries! but not Jews!

That's what I'm saying. It was nearly a century after Joseph Smith described the plates on which the Book of Mormon was recorded before any of these "actual artifacts" were ever discovered by "actual archaeologists." In Joseph Smith's day, the notion that any ancient people ever recorded their histories on metal plates was considered absolutely ludicrous because no such evidence had ever been found. Why didn't he just claim that he found some papyrus? Wouldn't it have been more believable?
Really? so where are the Golden plates? taken by Moroni to heaven? how convenient.

I don't understand why. If He were the Son of God, it would not have been at all impossible. If He was not who He claimed to be, then He was a "nice dose of Sci Fi" Himself.
Correct, Jesus was a Jewish man, and he died a tragic death for his vanity. he died in the outskirts of Jerusalem, mocked by Roman legionnaires, and that was it.

Why? So that you might actually reconsider what you've said and withdraw your sarcastic comments?
No really, are you not confident enough to provide material?

Amazing that you picked up on that!
Gee, finally some recognition. thousands of years of tradition from Moses to Sandy Koufax, of course I'd comment on that.

Well, you're easily amused, aren't you?
Oh yes, I'm a man of much humor, with some of the legends I have to read about my people I have to, unfortunately most of my humor is Sardonic, because I know the myth my people are in in the minds of other people.
 
Last edited:

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Honestly, why should I? a question is asked, and im giving the brutal and naked honesty.
No, you are not. Your statement (that Book of Mormons claims "Jews have arrived to the New World and now wear feathers on their heads and dear skin to cover their behinds") is not an accurate representation of what we believe. Furthermore, if I were a Native American, I would find your portrayal of them highly offensive.

should I say sweet lies about the BoM?
Nothing you have said is sweet, but most of what you've said is a lie.

most Jews and Christians find it irrelevant to their tradition, and most Jews find it offensive that they are depicted in such a way in it.
Most Jews don't have a clue how the Book of Mormon depicts them. Furthermore, they are portrayed in a very positive way. Stop making statements you can't possibly support.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
No, you are not. Your statement (that Book of Mormons claims "Jews have arrived to the New World and now wear feathers on their heads and dear skin to cover their behinds") is not an accurate representation of what we believe. Furthermore, if I were a Native American, I would find your portrayal of them highly offensive.
Jews as native Americans, how else should I describe it? my people have been priests in the temple of Solomon, have been the scribes in the Babylonian and Egyptian courts, they have nothing in common with native Americans. native Americans would not be offended as I am for having to be depicting as anything other than a what my tradition teaches me I am. native Americans have their long tradition, and we have ours, they should cherish and honor theirs, and we should cherish and honor ours.

Nothing you have said is sweet, but most of what you've said is a lie.
Everything I have said is bitter. and nothing about it is a lie.

Most Jews don't have a clue how the Book of Mormon depicts them. Furthermore, they are portrayed in a very positive way. Stop making statements you can't possibly support.
Jews living as native Americans is an insult to any Jewish man because it isnt our heritage, we do not look for positive depiction in your book, in fact we prefer it if you left our heritage out of it, and stop trying to hijack our tradition into yours. we dont want negative OR positive depiction, the BoM has no place reshaping our tradition or history that has been grounded by thousands of years of hard earned experience.
 
Last edited:

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Listen to yourself, everyone knows native people have lived in the Americas for centuries! but not Jews!
You listen to yourself. You are getting entirely too worked up over this. Calm down; it's just a discussion, and considering the fact that it's on the Comparative Religion forum, it's not even supposed to be a debate. And don't say, "The Mormons started it!!!" Start at the beginning of the thread and prove that accusation. All we're doing is responding to your posts. We've been on the defensive ever since the thread got started. All we've seen so far is a bunch of posts by people who have never read the book but who claim to be authorities on it. Just for the record, we don't believe that the majority of Native Americans are of Jewish heritage, so it would be nice if you would not exaggerate. Imagine that an extended family of, say, 30-50 Native Americans were to migrate to Sweden today, intermarried with the Swedes and remained in Sweden for the next 2500 years. Would it make any sense for someone in the year 4500 A.D. to say that some crazy religious group believes that the Swedes are really Native Americans? That's essentially what you are doing. You are accusing us of making a claim we aren't making.

Really? so where are the Golden plates? taken by Moroni to heaven? how convenient.
For you, yes. I can't say that it's been to our advantage.

No really, are you not confident enough to provide material?
I am both confident enough and well-read enough. I'm just smart enough to recognize that nothing I could possibly say would make the slightest bit of difference to you. Had the question been raised by someone I could see was the slighest bit sincere in asking it, you can bet your life I'd be providing material. Since returning to RF after an absence of several months, I've been a lot more selective about how I spend my time. I have never made it a practice to cut and paste, so any response I were to make on the subject would require a significant amount of time. I've already done the research, by the way, so it would just be a matter of compiling everything, organizing it all, and composing a post that could adequately refute your nonsense that there is nothing Jewish in the book. Still, it would probably take me a couple of hours, and for what? I'm not going to change your mind. Someday, someone will ask who will give my response some serious consideration. I'm willing to wait until that happens.

Gee, finally some recognition. thousands of years from Moses to Sandy Koufax, of course I'd comment on that.
Yeah, if it hadn't been a insult, you could be right proud of yourself.
 
Last edited:

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
You listen to yourself. You are getting entirely too worked up over this. Calm down; it's just a discussion, and considering the fact that it's on the Comparative Religion forum, it's not even supposed to be a debate. And don't say, "The Mormons started it!!!" Start at the beginning of the thread and prove that accusation. All we're doing is responding to your posts. We've been on the defensive ever since the thread got started. All we've seen so far is a bunch of posts by people who have never read the book but who claim to be authorities on it.
You are backtracking. I want hard archaeological evidence that my people have been living in the Americas. if you cannot provide them, then its a bad mark for the BoM.

For you, yes. I can't say that it's been to our advantage.
Neither to the world of archaeology... no physical proof, no evidence.

I am both confident enough and well-read enough. I'm just smart enough to recognize that nothing I could possibly say would make the slightest bit of difference to you. Had the question been raised by someone I could see was the slighest bit sincere in asking it, you can bet your life I'd be providing material. Since returning to RF after an absence of several months, I've been a lot more selective about how I spend my time. I have never made it a practice to cut and paste, so any response I were to make on the subject would require a significant amount of time. I've already done the research, by the way, so it would just be a matter of compiling everything, organizing it all, and composing a post that could adequately refute your nonsense that there is nothing Jewish in the book. Still, it would probably take me a couple of hours, and for what? I'm not going to change your mind. Someday, someone will ask who will give my response some serious consideration. I'm willing to wait until that happens.
Well, if you are not willing to stand up for your faith, as I am willing so stand up for my tradition, your tradition hasn't much to stand on.

Yeah, if it hadn't been a insult, you could be right proud of yourself.
The insult is, that an untrained American cracked Semitic linguistics.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
You are backtracking. I want hard archaeological evidence that my people have been living in the Americas. if you cannot provide them, then its a bad mark for the BoM.
I'm not backtracing. What do you know about genetic drift? That alone would explain why I can't give you hard archaeological evidence about "your people."

Well, if you are not willing to stand up for your faith, as I am willing so stand up for my tradition, your tradition hasn't much to stand on.
I've already explained why I'm not going to waste my time. Go ahead and make accusations if you want.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
I'm not backtracing. What do you know about genetic drift? That alone would explain why I can't give you hard archaeological evidence about "your people."
LOL. please you are only making it worse for the BoM, mixing in science only makes it more tragic.

I've already explained why I'm not going to waste my time. Go ahead and make accusations if you want.
Well, if you are not willing to make the case for the BoM, then we are at an impasse. if you have no material to support your claim that the BoM brings Semitic linguistics or heritage, we are at an impasse.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
LOL. please you are only making it worse for the BoM, mixing in science only makes it more tragic.
Oh, I see... I'm supposed to prove that a Jewish family immigrated to the Americas 2500, but I'm supposed to leave science out of it. That's generally not one of the rules I'm expected to comply with. Anyway, nothing either of us could say about the BofM could make it "worse for it." The book's validity or lack thereof doesn't stand or fall based on anything either of us might say.

Well, if you are not willing to make the case for the BoM, then we are at an impasse. if you have no material to support your claim that the BoM brings Semitic linguistics or heritage, we are at an impasse.
Why should I be making a case for something in a non-debate forum, Caladan? Why would a moderator try to goad me into breaking the rules? Besides, I've already said that when asked by someone who doesn't just want to try to rebute what I say, I will be willing to provide evidence. So, yes, it appears we are at an impasse. Let's see how long you can keep it that way.
 
Last edited:

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Oh, I see... I'm supposed to prove that a Jewish family immigrated to the Americas 2500, but I'm supposed to leave science out of it. That's generally not one of the rules I'm expected to comply with. Anyway, nothing either of us could say about the BofM could make it "worse for it." The book's validity or lack thereof doesn't stand or fall based on anything either of us might say.
This just keeps getting better, science has nothing to do with Jews living in the Americas thousands of years ago, because is it UNSCIENTIFIC! fiction and science don't mix!

Why should I be making a case for something in a non-debate forum, Caladan? That's against the rules. I've already said that when asked by someone who doesn't just want to try to rebute what I say, I will be willing to provide evidence. So, yes, it appears we are at an impasse. Let's see how long you can keep it that way.
An OP has been offered, and some of us have been completely honest with our opinion of the OP, if Mormons cannot take the heat, well get out of the kitchen, im good at moving this to a debate forum, and working on it right now.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
This just keeps getting better, science has nothing to do with Jews living in the Americas thousands of years ago, because is it UNSCIENTIFIC! fiction and science don't mix!
So I should attempt to prove it by faith? :biglaugh:

An OP has been offered, and some of us have been completely honest with our opinion of the OP, if Mormons cannot take the heat, well get out of the kitchen
I have been honest with my opinions, too. Offering your opinion is not the same thing as debating your opinion. You've been debating your opinion since the start. In other words, you've been breaking the rules since the start.

im good at moving this to a debate forum, and working on it right now.
Boy, a little bit of power sure does go to some people's heads. "Neener neener neener. I'm a mod and I can do things you can't do." Real mature, Caladan.

I'm sure you're very good at it; it's not that hard, as I recall. When I was a moderator, we weren't allowed to move threads to wherever it suited our personal preference. The OP was clearly not looking for a debate. You might at least consider asking his opinion before you attempt to move his thread to a forum where you can play by a different set of rules.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
So I should attempt to prove it by faith? :biglaugh:
I dont expect you to prove it in any way.

I have been honest with my opinions, too. Offering your opinion is not the same thing as debating your opinion. You've been debating your opinion since the start. In other words, you've been breaking the rules since the start.
If the member who started this OP didnt want the honest opinion of other members, he should never have made the challenge, the member who started this op challenged mine and several other members opinion and now we have a debate, which means that most chances are that we will finish this in a debate forum.

Boy, a little bit of power sure does go to some people's heads. "Neener neener neener. I'm a mod and I can do things you can't do." Real mature, Caladan.
Really Kathryn, if you can't handle a debate about your faith, than you are wise to have reconsidered a forum which specializes in debates about religion.

I'm sure you're very good at it; it's not that hard, as I recall. When I was a moderator, we weren't allowed to move threads to wherever it suited our personal preference. The OP was clearly not looking for a debate. You might at least consider asking his opinion before you attempt to move his thread to a forum where you can play by a different set of rules.
The OP was naive not to think it is not going to be a debate, the minute we provide our opinions the member who started this thread turned it into a debate.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I dont expect you to prove it in any way.
I see. You don't want proof. You just want me to provide "material" supporting my position. You want me to "stand up for" my position. You just don't want me to attempt to "prove" my position.

If the member who started this OP didnt want the honest opinion of other members, he should never have made the challenge, the member who started this op challenged mine and several other members opinion and now we have a debate, which means that most chances are that we will finish this in a debate forum.
The member who started the OP has not posted anything on it other than the OP itself. For crying out loud, if you're going to make statements like that, at least double-check your facts before you post them.

Really Kathryn, if you can't handle a debate about your faith, than you are wise to have reconsidered a forum which specializes in debates about religion.
You also need to learn to proof-read your posts before pressing the "Enter" key. This particular statement makes no sense. And if I couldn't handle debates about my faith, why the hell do you think I've stuck around for five years and a half years? Do you think I'm so stupid that I wouldn't have figured out that I "can't handle it" by now? There are only a handful of members who have been here longer. Most of the long-time posters have seen me debate my faith repeatedly over the years. You keep insisting that I "can't handle it." That's getting personal, and I don't appreciate it, particularly since I have clarified why I don't want to be bothered to write up a post just so that you to say something irrelevant about it. There is another poster on RF who asks for evidence, and then, after I've spent hours and hours providing it, says, "That's not evidence. I win! I win!" I can see our conversation going down that same road, based on pretty much everything you've said so far. You're trying to back me up against a wall by needling me (i.e. "you can't handle it"). I'd call that harrassment.

The OP was naive not to think it is not going to be a debate, the minute we provide our opinions the member who started this thread turned it into a debate.
He's naive, huh? So now you're making personal comments about the member who wrote the OP, too, I see. He wasn't even a Mormon (in case you hadn't noticed), so he has no interest at stake in the direction the thread takes. You and I do, but it's not your thread, is it? If you or I had started a thread on the Book of Mormon, it's safe bet we'd be looking for a debate. The OP wasn't. Furthermore, I don't think he'd appreciate being called "naive." Would you if it were your thread?
 
Last edited:

Midnight Pete

Well-Known Member
Oh, I promise I won't try to convert you. I'm not trying to do so. In fact, I don't even believe I have the power to convert you. You've just said a few things that don't really add up, which indicates to me that you haven't yet shared your real reasons for holding the Book of Mormon invalid.

The real reason I gave displeases you, so it is invalid. And I've just said a few things that "don't add up" because what I said wasn't endorsement of the BOM. Is this how the LDS trains its missionaries?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
The real reason I gave displeases you, so it is invalid. And I've just said a few things that "don't add up" because what I said wasn't endorsement of the BOM. Is this how the LDS trains its missionaries?
Who said anything about missionaries? This is an internet discussion forum. Why should it even resemble the mission field? As far as your final answer is concerned (basically, I don't appreciate it because I'm not a Mormon) was as good as anyone could expect of someone who hasn't actually read the book. At least you didn't try to second-guess what it says.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
I see. You don't want proof. You just want me to provide "material" supporting my position. You want me to "stand up for" my position. You just don't want me to attempt to "prove" my position.
I am saying that you have ZERO proof. none whatsoever, you know that, I know that, and you are going in circles now for a while refusing to admit it.

The member who started the OP has not posted anything on it other than the OP itself. For crying out loud, if you're going to make statements like that, at least double-check your facts before you post them.
He asked for opinions, he got them, he didnt like them, he challenged them, and now we have a debate. this just the turn out of events.

You also need to learn to proof-read your posts before pressing the "Enter" key. This particular statement makes no sense. And if I couldn't handle debates about my faith, why the hell do you think I've stuck around for five years and a half years? Do you think I'm so stupid that I'd have figured out that I "can't handle it" by now? There are only a handful of members who have been here longer. Most of the long-time posters have seen me debate my faith repeatedly over the years. You keep insisting that I "can't handle it." That's getting personal, and I don't appreciate it, particularly since I have clarified why I don't want to be bothered to write up a post just for you to say something irrelevant about. There is another poster on RF who asks for evidence, and then, after I've spent hours and hours providing it, says, "That's not evidence. I win! You lose!" I can see our conversation going down that same road, based on pretty much everything you've said so far. You're trying to back me up against a wall by needling me (i.e. "you can't handle it"). I'd call that harrassment.
You have provided zero evidence, if you cannot take the challenge then there is no point in making it more personal.

He's naive, huh? So now you're making personal comments about the member who wrote the OP, too, I see. He wasn't even a Mormon (in case you hadn't noticed), so he has no interest at stake in the direction the thread takes. You and I do, but it's not your thread, is it? If you or I had started a thread on the Book of Mormon, it's safe bet we'd be looking for a debate. The OP wasn't. Furthermore, I don't think he'd appreciate being called "naive." Would you if it were your thread?
You are only drilling this thread further more, stick to the topic. I know both you and the member who started this thread cannot live up to the challenge, but the least you can do is stick to it, after the challenge is made.
 

Midnight Pete

Well-Known Member
Who said anything about missionaries? This is an internet discussion forum. Why should it even resemble the mission field? As far as your final answer is concerned (basically, I don't appreciate it because I'm not a Mormon) was as good as anyone could expect of someone who hasn't actually read the book. At least you didn't try to second-guess what it says.

Are you still trying to sell it to me?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top