Do you actually *appreciate* the Book of Mormon?

[Katzpur]

Are you still trying to sell it to me?

What? What did I say to make you think I was selling something? You asked where you could read the book online. I told you. What did you want me to do? If you're referring to my comment about your not having read the book, it was entirely logical. If I asked you what you thought about some book on the New York Times best-seller list that you hadn't read, would you attempt to tell me what was wrong with it or would you say, "Sorry, I haven't read it"?

 

[idea]

Oh, I see... I'm supposed to prove that a Jewish family immigrated to the Americas 2500,

Actually, it wasn't a Jewish family... (not from Judah's line)

Lehi and his family are clearly not Jews. They belong to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into Ishmael's family, the tribe of Ephraim. (remember who Manasseh and Ephraim's mother was?) These tribes were carried away captive by the Assyrians, and did not contribute greatly to the current genetic mix of the Middle East.
Furthermore, the Middle East is located at the crossroads of three continents, and has seen a great deal of immigration, mixing, and intermarriage.

Sorry katz... Just sayin

 

[tomato1236]

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?

I'm talking about "Because the bible is complete". If that's all you want to say, just tell me and I'll leave it alone.

 

[Katzpur]

Actually, it wasn't a Jewish family... (not from Judah's line)

Lehi and his family are clearly not Jews. They belong to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into Ishmael's family, the tribe of Ephraim. (remember who Manasseh and Ephraim's mother was?) These tribes were carried away captive by the Assyrians, and did not contribute greatly to the current genetic mix of the Middle East.
Furthermore, the Middle East is located at the crossroads of three continents, and has seen a great deal of immigration, mixing, and intermarriage.

Sorry katz... Just sayin

Yup, I stand corrected.

 

[Midnight Pete]

What? What did I say to make you think I was selling something? You asked where you could read the book online. I told you. What did you want me to do? If you're referring to my comment about your not having read the book, it was entirely logical. If I asked you what you thought about some book on the New York Times best-seller list that you hadn't read, would you attempt to tell me what was wrong with it or would you say, "Sorry, I haven't read it"?

I haven't read the BOM and now I've changed my mind about having a look at it online. I want nothing to do with it or Mormonism. I'm being completely honest with you out of respect. Honesty is admirable, isn't it?

 

[Midnight Pete]

I'm talking about "Because the bible is complete". If that's all you want to say, just tell me and I'll leave it alone.

That is all I wanted to say. Let's end the discussion here while we're still amicable.

 

[tomato1236]

I haven't read the BOM and now I've changed my mind about having a look at it online. I want nothing to do with it or Mormonism. I'm being completely honest with you out of respect. Honesty is admirable, isn't it?

Seriously. This is the kind of stuff you need to say. Other people may not agree with me, but when I hear you don't want to discuss it that's fine, and I'll drop it. There's just an assumption that if you put your opinion up and don't support it, that you're open to discussion. If you're not, you should say so so it doesn't get all intense. We don't need you to read the Book of Mormon. Really doesn't make a difference to me, anyway. It might help you know more about what you're invalidating, but that's for you, not for us, and if you say you don't want to discuss, then I'm done discussing it with you. No prob, bob.

 

[Katzpur]

I haven't read the BOM and now I've changed my mind about having a look at it online. I want nothing to do with it or Mormonism. I'm being completely honest with you out of respect. Honesty is admirable, isn't it?

Sure it is. I don't care whether you want to read it or not.

 

[Autodidact]

And this is impossible why?

(1) They didn't have the technology to get there.
(2) They did not in fact go there.

Not strange in the slightest, although completely unknown in Joseph Smith's day. Today you can see quite a number of these in museums around the world.

But the ones you can't see are the ones the Mormon religion is based on. Funny, that.

How about an example or two? I'm trying to think of anything relating to science fiction in the Book of Mormon.

Imaginary animals.
The idea that Ancient Israelites traveled to the New World and left Indian descendants.
Non-existent industries, crops, and artifacts.

Remote in terms of location, yes. But remote in what other ways? Seriously, I'd appreciate an answer to this one, because everywhere I look in the Book of Mormon, I can see themes, customs, culture and linguistic evidence that it is, in fact, an ancient semitic document.

Not that you're biased in any way.
Hint: It all happens in a different continent.

You really didn't read very far, did you?

No, why, does it get better? Or more real?

 

[McBell]

I don't know what you're talking about. This is just Mestemia being Mestemia.

I take it you do not know then?

Perhaps you should learn how your Bible came into existence.

 

[Autodidact]

Excuse me? There were people throughout the Americas long before the arrival of Colombus or the Vikings. Where did they come from?

Siberia.

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?

Because he had no idea what was and was not plausible.

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.

Gotta agree with that.

 

[Autodidact]

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.

What? The BoM doesn't claim that ancient Israelites traveled to the New World and are the ancestors of American Indians? If not, I've been misled. Maybe I should read 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.

They are depicted in a way that is simply not true. That is the point. There were no such immigrants. It didn't happen. It's not true.

 

[Autodidact]

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.

Well you did, until science made it clear that it was impossible. So exactly what did happen to the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Jewish immigrants to the New World described in the BoM? Did the evaporate without leaving any artifacts. Oh yeah...they did.

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.

The BoM isn't about 30-50 people. It depicts enormous battles with hundreds of thousands of troops using chariots, swords and shields, and then leaving not a single artifact of any such battle, and not a single trace of DNA in a single American Indian. Amazing. It's almost as though it never happened.

For you, yes. I can't say that it's been to our advantage.

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.

Quite the contrary. All you would have to do is produce any actual archeological evidence supporting the story in the BoM. Feel free to start any time.

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.

I see. You could prove that the BoM is correct, but you can't be bothered. I'll just say that if you did, you would be the first person in the history of the world, and a great hero to the LDS Church. But I understand that your time is much too important.

I on the other hand am happy to provide evidence that clearly demonstrates that the BoM is completely, utterly, totally false, from start to finish. Nothing in it ever happened. Period.

 

[Autodidact]

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."

I've already explained why I'm not going to waste my time. Go ahead and make accusations if you want.

No, mitochondrial DNA of millions of people does not just drift into non-existence. Had there been the millions of Lammanites, Nephites and Jaredites described in the BoM, there would be DNA evidence of their descendants, as well as archeological evidence of their implements, their crops, their flocks, their industries, their buildings. There would be linguistic evidence of their languages. There is none of this. None. Zip. Nada. It didn't happen.

 

[Autodidact]

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."

I've already explained why I'm not going to waste my time. Go ahead and make accusations if you want.

If you're not going to bother supporting your assertions, then there is no point in making them.

 

[Autodidact]

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.

I repeat. The BoM describes huge armies that would require millions of people to support. Not a single family, but millions of people. Just the metallurgical industry to smelt metal and produce swords cannot happen without hundreds of people and obvious artifacts and changes to the environment.

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.

If you're not willing or able to debate, then you should stop making claims and expecting other people to accept them.

 

[Autodidact]

So I should attempt to prove it by faith? :biglaugh:

That's your only hope, because the evidence proves that it's false.

 

[Riverwolf]

***MOD POST***
Thread closed for review
​