What is odd about the Book of Mormon?

[Sola'lor]

This thread makes me laugh.

 

[Humanistheart]

That's not "addressing" Katz post - that's dismissing it out of hand.

Penguin addressed it point for point, breaking it down in sections. If you feel there is some evidence that has not been properly addressed, why don't you type it out, or provide the post link for it as was previously requested? Or at least give some support for you claim that this alleged evidence was A) merely dismissed and B) exists.

 

[Autodidact]

The BoM has not been proven false. Rather, you and others simply dismiss evidence for the BoM out of hand. That's not a victory.

No, actually, we responded to each and every tiny little hint of anything that could remotely be called "evidence." Meanwhile, no one has responded to the huge, enormous, elephantine consensus of every field of relevant study that there no factual basis for it, or the gigantic gaping lack of all of the artifacts and ruins you would expect to find if it were true. In fact, no one on the LDS side has even acknowledged this problem.

That's victory.

We don't expect to persuade any Mormons; you're not interested in the evidence.

 

[Autodidact]

Katzpur posted various evidences and they were simply dismissed out of hand - they were not debunked. That's not victory.

No, they were debunked. Maybe you're not reading. Katzpur suggests that there was actually honey in the New World (without citing any source.) The LDS leadership says the BoM doesn't say there was. Katzpur suggests that there is some possibility of barley somewhere--without citing any source. I tracked it down to a Mormon source about a shred of an early form of barley in Arizona. But neither you nor Katzpur asserts that the "Lamanites" lived in Arizona, so it doesn't matter.

Meanwhile, no one has touched on the utter absence of:
horses
cattle
elephants
steel
chariots
silver and gold coinage
etc.
etc.

I mean, these are not tiny items we're looking for. These are thousands of great big, hard things, not just a horse skeleton or two, but entire armies of them. Not a sword here and there, but enormous battles with thousands of them. And we can't find a hint of one? FAIL

 

[Sententia]

That's not "addressing" Katz post - that's dismissing it out of hand.

There is none, 0, nada and zip in terms of archelogical evidence for the BoM. You know it. Katz knows it. I know it. Who are you talking to? (Wikipedia, Smithsonian) We could go into numerous details here and just search... this has been debated many times before.

The evidence suggested by the Mormon Apologetics is typically that of linguistic and content. (But not Joe's document concerning HOW he deciphered an Egyptian burial papyri utilizing his god given translation skills into a complete mockery of the actual text in order to serve his own needs. Nibley put that baby to bed.)

In the other thread we discussed this fairly in detail before it got deleted because a fine upstanding mormon boy started posting cooking recipes, straying off topic and in general passing out insults and never addressing actual replies to him from either mormons or non-mormons.

Even in the same thread you said you were going to get some book to address my points academically which you have until now not done.

Katz's post was addressed and questions were asked and she clammed up. I did not judge 9-10s response to be abusive in any way. And in fact he referenced other conversations with one Deepshadow, self proclaimed mensa mormon who found his questions interesting but who also never responded.

Further... no one is declaring victory but it is personally interesting to me to watch you talk out both sides of your mouth. Essentially you understand this argument. You are reaching out to other mormons and from the looks of things not making a whole lot of headway. (1)

You have said:

And what happens when "modern evidence" further disproves the Book of Mormon as time goes on?

Modern evidence already has stated such. The BOM and its obvious forgery is obvious to many more then it has persuaded but what is astounding is just how many it has in its clutches. Mormons sometimes like to take the stance that they are so small just fast growing why persecute us routine... our beliefs are sacred and not meant for just anyone etc etc cop out... and I have spoke on that subject before... But facts are it is interesting. One obvious example is: Big Love... HBO and a very popular show. (I personally have no idea why... I didn't really find it entertaining but more interesting then that is its R rating and the fact that so many mormons watch it.) And really you don't to click all these links as I am fairly certain you have seen them before but many others have mentioned the BOM and other Joe Smith Texts as False. (Skeptoid, Dawkins, Hitchens and read God is NOT Great, or listen to so many ex-mormons this post would be too long to post them all but Steve Benson who is the modern day grandson of a very important Mormon Prophet and who has been deep in the whole mormon faith and who spent his youth raised as LDS, went overseas to Japan for LDS and who is now an Atheist... Your closer to the church then he was?)

So post cookie recipes. Report me. Get the thread locked. If you want to actually debate something then follow through mate. (Did you find that book you needed mate or who cares now that thread is deleted? baleeted?) After all the BOM and the mormon claim is the extraordinary one that needs the backing. What always strikes me as odd with the mormons is they say they have this huge heaven with level 1 and 2 and 3 and some may even attain god hood.... but yet their out baptizing the dead and going overseas to convert people to mormonism when the people they are converting would have already gotten into some level of heaven to begin with. (I know heaven First class is the place they need to be though... so keep up the good work).

That aside... Mormons on this forum have not all been nice to me or others that think differently. I and others get smacked around a lot by mormons or they are in general just plain rude. (Not Katz... She has always been nice) But really were supposed to walk on eggshells while we get insulted? Even in this thread though you can see Apex attacking Fishhunter who hasn't said BOO in this thread. In my own experience when I debated Deepshadow I thought there were many mormons responding and interested but when I pointed out the logical fallacies and that I was playing along to explore a topic I got several PMs and post deletions. Even the benevolent katzpur who I typically get along with is not always nice:

What makes you think any Latter-day Saint on this forum cares what your opinion is? You're posting on the LDS DIR. Don't.

Obviously you can read that in context here but it doesn't seem very nice to me especially considering LDS post in secular forums and LDS have their own private forum we general normal folk cant post in anyways.
Not that I hold it against her... But I found it offensive and felt sorry for the poor person she was responding too. Why should people be made to feel that way and how is that a good thing?

Most of the time I feel like mormons are trying to judge me based on what is obviously a false book that so few accept. (And I guess I will state again, to preempt the classic appeal to numbers, that the predominantly christian United States of America has more Atheists and Agnostics then Mormons have members Worldwide)

Anyways mate... the claim that evidence for the 'BOM' was simply dismissed is demonstrably false while the evidence presented against the BOM is where? Deleted, Protested and whined against.... Why waste time? (You are calling 9-10s post an outright dismissal which clearly it wasn't so color that in the whining and lying category which anyone can go back and read and either agree with me or you but one of us is not telling the truth...)

 

[OmarKhayyam]

"Relativism is hugely important for this topic. If the BoM says "A is true" and the Bible says "A is false" then one of the books is making a false statement and we can't say that both of them are infallible."

It is my observation oft repeated observation - that theist can and DO hold 2 or more contradictory and mutually exclusive propositions to be true.

And do this sincerely never realizing they ARE doing so. Such is the power of religious faith to corrode human reason.

 

[Watchmen]

Again - they were not debunked - you just disagree with the evidence she posted. It still is "evidence." Do you know what the word means?

 

[Autodidact]

Again - they were not debunked - you just disagree with the evidence she posted. It still is "evidence." Do you know what the word means?

Yes, it's evidence. No question about it. Weak, tiny, inconclusive, LDS promoted evidence, most of it refuted. Meanwhile on the other side, we have evidence. Huge, consistent, consilient, unbiased, overwhelming conclusive evidence.

Hey, forget the artifacts. Three letters: DNA.

And that's before we go into the non-existent language, bizarre "translation" method, failed attempts to "translate" other documents supposedly in the same language, self-serving nature of the entire enterprise, previous reputation for veracity, horrible track record of subsequent prophets, long history of racism, etc. etc.

Here's the short version:
If the BoM were true, we would expect to see X, Y and Z. We don't see X, Y or Z. Therefore the BoM is false.

 

[Watchmen]

Yes, it's evidence. No question about it. Weak, tiny, inconclusive, LDS promoted evidence, most of it refuted. Meanwhile on the other side, we have evidence. Huge, consistent, consilient, unbiased, overwhelming conclusive evidence.

Hey, forget the artifacts. Three letters: DNA.

And that's before we go into the non-existent language, bizarre "translation" method, failed attempts to "translate" other documents supposedly in the same language, self-serving nature of the entire enterprise, previous reputation for veracity, horrible track record of subsequent prophets, long history of racism, etc. etc.

Here's the short version:
If the BoM were true, we would expect to see X, Y and Z. We don't see X, Y or Z. Therefore the BoM is false.

It's funny. You're doing exactly what Katzpur said you would.

 

[Autodidact]

Yup. Applying the scientific method. I'm all about empiricism.

 

[Autodidact]

Here's another angle. Let's take for example anthropologists studying the origin of Native Americans. They didn't know how they got here and had no investment one way or the other, whether they came overland from China, over water from Pacific Islands, over water from Southern Africa and spread north, or by boat from the Mediterranean. Their careers didn't depend on it. They weren't out to disprove the BoM, and most of them probably didn't know it said anything on the subject.

Analysing the DNA and the archeological evidence, they concluded that they came overland from North East-China via Siberia. There is no DNA evidence that they came from the ANE. So, for the BoM to be true, these anthropologists would need to be wrong--deluded, mistaken, erroneous. So, what, anthropology doesn't work? Or all the dumb people go into anthropology? To see the truth, you have to have on special underwear? It doesn't make sense.

 

[Apex]

I may have missed it in the 74 pages, but has anyone actually responded to material on these topics published by LDS scholars? Or has it merley been dismissed out of hand?

 

[Humanistheart]

I may have missed it in the 74 pages, but has anyone actually responded to material on these topics published by LDS scholars? Or has it merley been dismissed out of hand?

LDS scholars? Sounds like an oxymoron, but anyway, I don't know. Why don't you post the best or official responces from these so called scholars (not just some link to a mormon site) along with legitimate sources and they'll be looked it.

 

[Autodidact]

I may have missed it in the 74 pages, but has anyone actually responded to material on these topics published by LDS scholars? Or has it merley been dismissed out of hand?

Which are you referring to?

 

[Humanistheart]

It's funny. You're doing exactly what Katzpur said you would.

Really? Katz said auto would disprove the book of mormon?

 

[Autodidact]

btw, I have an outstanding offer to anyone on the LDS side for a one-on-one on the historicity of the BoM. Any takers?

 

[Apex]

LDS scholars? Sounds like an oxymoron

I will take that as an answer to my question.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

Has anyone else noted a similarity between the defense of the BoM by its believers and the defense of Creationism by its believers?

 

[Humanistheart]

I will take that as an answer to my question.

And I soppose this answers mine. You don't list any because you can't.

 

[Humanistheart]

Has anyone else noted a similarity between the defense of the BoM by its believers and the defense of Creationism by its believers?

They are starting to look similiar.