False Prophet=Joseph Smith=Brigham Young

[Guest]

Very good! You used the QUOTE button.

I did provide a specific quote. You refuse to believe it apparently. As for the rest of your comments...

You wouldn't have this problem if you cut-and-paste instead of paraphrasing and interpreting.

Grindael, on what basis did you exchange one body of supernatural mythology (Mormonism) for another (contemporary Christianity)?

In other words...

A) How do you know there's a god, and

B) How do you know it's the god of the Bible?

[_maklelan]

Engaging someone “professionally” doesn't automatically give anyone expertise.

Not automatically, but to sustain a successful engagement of that ideology over time in a professional context demands expertise.

Using your argument, you are not a scholar of the Fundamentalist persuasion, therefore you are not qualified to speak for them.

I am qualified to assess their arguments.

I was talking about Carson, and I gave you a link.

You linked me to an evangelical website's article that quoted Carson at the beginning and the end. You did not link me to Carson's argument.

You said that you had never heard of any “scholar” giving that exegesis,

No, I said it's one I've never seen in my several years of reading New Testament scholarship. That remains true.

and I provided one. It is legitimate, if you care to try and combat my argument, have at it.

No, you referred to one. If you'd like to specify a publication, I'll be happy to engage it insofar as I can access it.

The only strawman argument, is yours. You called Jesus a liar. You won’t say if you believe this is true.

I've repeatedly explained that I do not know. I cannot give you any other answer.

Of course you won’t, because you know it is being hypocritical on your part. Fundamentalist Christians believe no such thing, and neither do the Mormons, who you are supposedly here to defend. Unless you are not defending Jo and the Church and are only here to promulgate non-believer arguments. If so, then everything about Jo that was posted stands, because you have no argument.

I notice you never engage about matters of your own faith, why is that?

Not here for that.

You hide behind the term scholar, but that carries little weight.

Compared to faith claims you just nakedly assert, yes it carries quite a bit of weight.

There are lots of those that disagree with all of your premises.

Then explain my premises and engage them. I'd be happy to respond. Just telling me that I'm wrong carries little weight.

I asked you a simple question whether you believe Jesus is a liar, since you called him one, but you won’t answer it.

No, I've repeatedly answered it honestly and directly. I don't know. I can't say what words are his and what words are not.

As to you being a bad Mormon, you brought that up, not me. Perhaps you are feeling guilty that you can’t defend your own faith?

Uh, no. That's not it.

[_grindael]

But nothing specific regarding Tyre? Riiiiight...

Right. That is in the Sunday School manual I quoted which is published with the approval and inspiration of the Mormon prophets, seers and revelators. That carries weight. The Maxwell institute publications do not, unless they are written by one of the 15 big guys. That is why they have disclaimers on the the articles there.

[Guest]

But nothing specific regarding Tyre? Riiiiight...

Right. That is in the Sunday School manual I quoted which is published with the approval and inspiration of the Mormon prophets, seers and revelators. That carries weight. The Maxwell institute publications do not, unless they are written by one of the 15 big guys. That is why they have disclaimers on the the articles there.

Exact quote please, with context & etc.

And one more thing...

A) How do you know there's a god, and

B) How do you know it's the god of the Bible?

Are you ignoring this on purpose? If so, why?

[_maklelan]

So how does your being "a professional" debater? have anything to do with expertise on a given subject?

I'm not a professional debater, I'm a biblical scholar. You caught me with my pants down once two years ago. I admitted it. Are you suggesting that because I was wrong once, I have to be wrong now, or is this just a juvenile way to bring up that I had to admit I was wrong?

[_maklelan]

Daniel went after someone with the claim that Jesus is a liar. He offers no proof of this, but an exegesis of Matthew 24 that he somehow ascribes to "Fundamentalists", after the fact. Of course they don't believe this.

No proof? The text has Jesus say that his second coming will occur before the deaths of people living at the time he prophesied. This did not happen. Challenge my reading and I will be happy to fully engage your argument. Telling me I offered nothing and am just wrong because you say so doesn't cut it. If you'd like to engage this argument directly I'd be perfectly happy to respond. I already did that for your claims about Tyre, and you were shown to be grotesquely uninformed. You willing to have another go?

As for viewing Mormonism from a monolithic perspective, they have set it up to be that way. Can you get up in a Sacrament Meeting and say that because Ezekiel's prophecy of Tyre failed you must be calling Jesus a liar?

There's a difference between a commonly held belief and a monolithic church.

Serious questions would be raised. You can believe whatever you like in Mormonism, but if your beliefs clash with the approved doctrine of the church, and you teach them publicly, there are consequences.

The list of those beliefs is quite small.

Individual beliefs carry no weight in Mormonism. One must be ordained and set apart as a "prophet, seer, and revelator" for doctrinal statements to carry weight. One of the purposes of this discussion forum is that people disagree with what statements carry weight.

Daniel is slandering an entire group of Christians, saying that because of the way they interpret Biblical prophecy they must logically be calling Christ a liar, yet his own faith teaches as official doctrine that those prophecies were literally fulfilled, and so using his argument, Mormonism does the same thing.

Don't try to put words in my mouth.

His argument is a straw man.

So show me that Jesus (as portrayed in the gospels, to be clear) wasn't wrong.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Grindael, in becoming a contemporary Christian, would you agree you've simply exchanged one body of mythology for another? If not, why?

[_grindael]

Not automatically, but to sustain a successful engagement of that ideology over time in a professional context demands expertise.

What makes you think you are successful?

] I am qualified to assess their arguments.

That’s debatable.

You linked me to an evangelical website's article that quoted Carson at the beginning and the end. You did not link me to Carson's argument.

Since you are such a great scholar I’m sure you can figure out where to find it.

No, I said it's one I've never seen in my several years of reading New Testament scholarship. That remains true.

You actually said,

Additionally, your exegesis is one that I have never seen in my several years of reading New Testament scholarship. When readings are promoted only by amateurs and never by scholars, it is usually for a reason.

What does never by scholars mean Daniel. Put your brain to work here, if you can. The arrogance is palpable.

No, you referred to one. If you'd like to specify a publication, I'll be happy to engage it insofar as I can access it.

Quibbling.

I've repeatedly explained that I do not know. I cannot give you any other answer.

If you don’t know, then why are you calling him a liar? Non sequitur.

Not here for that.

Obviously. You are only here to present straw man arguments. Nice job.

Compared to faith claims you just nakedly assert, yes it carries quite a bit of weight.

Not really.

Then explain my premises and engage them. I'd be happy to respond. Just telling me that I'm wrong carries little weight.

I did. You refuse to answer, as this group of petty partial sentences reveals.

No, I've repeatedly answered it honestly and directly. I don't know. I can't say what words are his and what words are not.

Don’t know much, do you? Thanks for repeating this often.

Uh, no. That's not it.

Yeah, right.

[Guest]

Grindael, in becoming a modern Trinitarian Christian, would you agree you've simply exchanged one body of mythology for another? If not, why?

[_grindael]

So how does your being "a professional" debater? have anything to do with expertise on a given subject?

I'm not a professional debater, I'm a biblical scholar. You caught me with my pants down once two years ago. I admitted it. Are you suggesting that because I was wrong once, I have to be wrong now, or is this just a juvenile way to bring up that I had to admit I was wrong?

No, it goes to your whole arrogant attitude. You had the same attitude then. History has a funny way of repeating itself.