Recovery from MAD

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Pokatator wrote:You can't put the Book of Mormon in the same category as equal to the Bible, both are a leap of faith...true. But the Book of Mormon is beyond a quantum leap.


OMG! I about cried when I read this. I'm getting looks in the computer lab from these big muscley looking dudes cause I'm still giggling. OMG! That's funny. Someone give me some more sig room so I can add this....holy cow that made my day!

I can just imagine Scott Bakula and that guy with the universal remote control now....
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Off Topic: Just checked on some homophobe threads by the resident MADites and noticed that the poster Zoidberg was banned. May he/she be counted among the Banites for their work on the famous bikini thread.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

Bond...James Bond wrote:Off Topic: Just checked on some homophobe threads by the resident MADites and noticed that the poster Zoidberg was banned. May he/she be counted among the Banites for their work on the famous bikini thread.


Really? They banned him? I enjoyed his posts. And yes, that thread is so over-the-top homophobic I don't dare post on it.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Runtu wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:Off Topic: Just checked on some homophobe threads by the resident MADites and noticed that the poster Zoidberg was banned. May he/she be counted among the Banites for their work on the famous bikini thread.


Really? They banned him? I enjoyed his posts. And yes, that thread is so over-the-top homophobic I don't dare post on it.


Yeah I went looking for a specific banning post and instead found this little nugget by the resident idiot charity, who is very close to being crowned "Queen of Irony":

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=28248

You make such blanket assumptions and generalizations, your posts cease to make rational sense. There are many significant women mentioned in the Bible, in the New Testament, even, which supports the idea that women were respected. There are mentions of prophetesses, faithful women in the Church, of course Mary who is respected above all other women.

Please post more intelligently. I have never put anyone on ignore before, but you are tempting me greatly.


Oh yeah here's Orpheus dropping the hammer.

Not annoying posters is a good idea, having something to say is even better but not annoying mods is a requirement. You are outta here. - Orpheus
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
_skippy the dead
_Emeritus
Posts: 1676
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:39 am

Post by _skippy the dead »

Runtu wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:Off Topic: Just checked on some homophobe threads by the resident MADites and noticed that the poster Zoidberg was banned. May he/she be counted among the Banites for their work on the famous bikini thread.


Really? They banned him? I enjoyed his posts. And yes, that thread is so over-the-top homophobic I don't dare post on it.


Her.

And I guess she "annoyed the mods." Is that the new standard for permission to post now - cannot annoy the mods?
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

skippy the dead wrote:
And I guess she "annoyed the mods." Is that the new standard for permission to post now - cannot annoy the mods?


Sorry, I didn't know her enough to know she was a "her."

If annoying the mods is a capital offense, I'm in a hell of a lot of trouble.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Post by _why me »

Runtu wrote:why me's "speculation" mantra is an extension of the common apologist tactic of stating that there's an evidentiary stalemate (enough evidence to make either side work), as if it's just a matter of deciding which evidence to accept. The problem is that, at least for the Book of Mormon, there is no evidentiary stalemate. The evidence clearly indicates that the book is a 19th-century work; as you said, the evidence that it is of ancient origin amounts to bupkis.

If it were not so, we wouldn't see the approach of the apologists, which is to rationalize away objections in an effort to make the Book of Mormon plausible. Even the suggestion that it's plausible is at this point mere wishful thinking.

Well, let me put it this way. Antimormonism began right from the beginning of the LDS church. Books were published, people hooted and shouted against the Mormons, antitheories were unleashed....and yet, to no avail. No one has proven the book false. The open window was in the very beginning when the church was organized and yet, the big antimormon players at that time, didn't even make a dent.

And yet, here we are today, still debating the same crapola about the church. And to what end? Nothing has changed. Nothing can be proven or disproven. And here is the apologist problem: to constantly debate over what cannot be proven or disproven. Likewise for the critic...and this is the problem at the MAD board.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

why me wrote:Well, let me put it this way. Antimormonism began right from the beginning of the LDS church. Books were published, people hooted and shouted against the Mormons, antitheories were unleashed....and yet, to no avail. No one has proven the book false. The open window was in the very beginning when the church was organized and yet, the big antimormon players at that time, didn't even make a dent.

And yet, here we are today, still debating the same crapola about the church. And to what end? Nothing has changed. Nothing can be proven or disproven. And here is the apologist problem: to constantly debate over what cannot be proven or disproven. Likewise for the critic...and this is the problem at the MAD board.


It seems to me that the only ones who see no proof are those who have a reason not to. I don't spend a lot of time debating, as you put it, for the reason you give. The evidence is there, it's plain and simple, and the only people who want to debate are those who wish to disregard the evidence in favor of a subjective appeal to the spirit. So, in that sense, I agree with you. I see no reason to argue about the evidence.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Post by _why me »

Pokatator wrote:To the dear "Victim"....Why Me

I agree that everything does boil down to faith. But lumping the Bible and the Book of Mormon into the same category and calling them equal is absurd. I don't want to debate whether God can be proved or the miracles of Jesus can be proved, etc. But let's just try to realistic and take score of what can be proved.

On the Bible side:
Jesus can be proved to really to have existed
We have many codex's, numerous volumes of the Bible written, the Dead Sea Scrolls
Outside sources that at least Jesus walked the earth, Roman sources etc.
Physical evidence of places that existed in the writings

Does this prove Jesus was divine...no
But it proves that places and people existed as the Bible says

So, at least, there is some kind of score on the Bible's side.

What is the score for the Book of Mormon?

Absolutely......ZERO
Nothing collaborates the Book of Mormon except the evidence of a 19th century writing of a novel and it's witnesses. In other words, ZERO.

You can't put the Book of Mormon in the same category as equal to the Bible, both are a leap of faith...true. But the Book of Mormon is beyond a quantum leap.

You have just made my point. I said that Jesus can be proven and archeology too. But it can not be proven that he was the son of god. It takes faith. For the Book of Mormon, if someone ever discovers the name nephi in mesoamerica would you be convinced about the Book of Mormon? I think so. And what then? The next logical leap would be that god exists. Do you need faith for such a belief? No. because you have proof.

But we do have witnesses that have not retracted their testimonies and went to their grave never denying seeing the plates.
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

Pokatator wrote:What is the score for the Book of Mormon?

Absolutely......ZERO
Nothing collaborates the Book of Mormon except the evidence of a 19th century writing of a novel and it's witnesses. In other words, ZERO.

You can't put the Book of Mormon in the same category as equal to the Bible, both are a leap of faith...true. But the Book of Mormon is beyond a quantum leap.

To be fair, that's not entirely true.

There are evidences that point to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Granted, they are weak, but they do exist. So you can't say there is ZERO.
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
Post Reply