Discussing the Reality of the Fictional Curelom's

[_zerinus]

Dumb comment. Nothing but archaic rubbish cobbled together by lying cultists to defraud irrational and illiterate Z-boy types. Proves absolutely nothing. There are such fake religious implements in cultures throughout the world and history. Try testing them; they don't work. They all rely on the "faith" (gullibility) of the believer. You really are desperate, aren't you?

Some people like to turn stupidity into a virtue. It doesn’t work.

[_Maksutov]

Dumb comment. Nothing but archaic rubbish cobbled together by lying cultists to defraud irrational and illiterate Z-boy types. Proves absolutely nothing. There are such fake religious implements in cultures throughout the world and history. Try testing them; they don't work. They all rely on the "faith" (gullibility) of the believer. You really are desperate, aren't you?

Some people like to turn stupidity into a virtue. It doesn’t work.

It hasn't worked for you, has it?

Here's the legacy of your holy prophet. Defend it, why don't you?

[_Dr Exiled]

That mic drop must have hurt Z. I was over at some other sites when I heard the crash and had to come over here and investigate.

Incidentally, I'd like to see you defend Jeffs in this series of pictures. The girl does look like Helen Mar Kimball

[_Maksutov]

You are talking rubbish, total rubbish, absolute rubbish. No comment required.

Once again I compliment you on your insight. I had come to believe your insights were rare. But you proved me wrong.

Of course I know that talking about biblical fictional characters and objects ,like cherubs (cherubbim) and urim and thummim is rubbish. Fictional rubbish. Like trying to have a dead serious conversation about Santa Claus or hobgobblins or fairies. They are all products of imagination. Totally fictional without even the slightest possibility of being true.

But small children like rubbish like that. Parents even encourage such fantasies when the children are small. "Be good. Santa keeps track of naughty boys" or "Put your baby tooth under your pillow and the tooth fairy will replace it with money".

At some point the kids catch on and hesitantly ask, "Santa isn't real, Is he?"

Parents know when the game is up. Santa stops being the inquisition godsend to keep kids in line. AT some point, after all the baby teeth have fallen out, the tooth fairy disappears.

Religions, however, manage to keep the fantasy going. "Be good or you'll go to Hell." "God knows what you're thinking." "Terrible things will happen if you break the 10 commandments. Don't desire your neighbours wife. Don't desire your neighbours car." stuff like that.

Even invented un-English fantasies, like cherubs and cureloms manage to hang on.

But you're right. It's all rubbish

[_Choyo Chagas]

I searched. Here is a curelom:



and here is a cumom:



Do they look right to you, or do you want me to try again?

zerinus, you've presented for consideration a "fabled beast" from the children's "iLoveScience" site, and a "greyhooffull" from the online game World of Warcraft.

So when it's god vs. google, you go to google. That pretty much answers the fictional question, doesn't it?

i have another approach...

according to the scripture;

... And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms.

please, zerinus, teach us - heathens - which way are/were the cureloms and cumoms useful unto man

i hope the scripture is your daily reading

[_zerinus]

i have another approach...

according to the scripture;

... And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms.

please, zerinus, teach us - heathens - which way are/were the cureloms and cumoms useful unto man

i hope the scripture is your daily reading

It doesn't say. Why is that important? Historically there are two main ways that animals have been useful to man: as beasts of burden, or for food (or both). There are other less significant ways too; like pets, or guard dogs, or sheep dogs etc. Since it doesn't say, your guess is as good as mine. Why is that important?

[_Choyo Chagas]

Why is that important?

i may disillusion you; the whole Book of Mormon is a ho-hum for me

only i'd like to know that the types of preachers as you can comprehend their scriptures during reading - or only parroting them

[_bcuzbcuz]

They were not fictional characters. They were real objects. The Urim and Thummim were special stones set in Aaron’s priestly garments (Ex. 28:30; Lev. 8:8). The ephod was a special ceremonial garment worn by the priests (Ex. 28:4, 6, 8, 12, 15, 25-28, 31). A cherub (plural cherubim) was an ornamental statue, figurine, or image of a winged creature used to decorate their sacred artefacts. They were real objects or images carved, chiseled, shaped, or sewn on to cloth.

If you say so. But please inform me where I can see a Urim and Thump. Or Aaron's priestly garments. I have seen Abraham's porridge pot at the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul. I know it works as a porridge pot because it has all the outward signs of being able to serve as such a utensil. I have seen a picture of one of Joseph Smith's seer stones. But nothing in its outward appearance confirms the purpose it was supposed to serve.

I have seen pictures of Cherubs. I have seen sculptures of cherubs in France and Italy and Spain. But I have never seen anything in real life that convinces me that cherubs are anything other than fictional creatures. Show me the beef. Provide a single evidence of cherubs actually existing. Statues and paintings are not proof.

I've seen gargoyles on churches in Italy, Spain and France, among others. Do gargoyles exist according to you?

[_zerinus]

If you say so. But please inform me where I can see a Urim and Thump. Or Aaron's priestly garments. I have seen Abraham's porridge pot at the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul. I know it works as a porridge pot because it has all the outward signs of being able to serve as such a utensil. I have seen a picture of one of Joseph Smith's seer stones. But nothing in its outward appearance confirms the purpose it was supposed to serve.

I have seen pictures of Cherubs. I have seen sculptures of cherubs in France and Italy and Spain. But I have never seen anything in real life that convinces me that cherubs are anything other than fictional creatures. Show me the beef. Provide a single evidence of cherubs actually existing. Statues and paintings are not proof.

I've seen gargoyles on churches in Italy, Spain and France, among others. Do gargoyles exist according to you?

"Where you can find them" is not an issue. The issue is what English words do you use to translate the original words into English. If the original Hebrew words do not have an English equivalent, what do you do? How do you translate them into English? That is the question. The answer is that you don't translate them at all. You say the same words or sounds, but using the English letters. The Hebrew word for "cherub" for example is כְּרוּב‎‎ (pronounced kərūv). There is no native English word that is equivalent to that, so you you translate it by not translating it at all, but try to say the same sounds using English letters, which comes out roughly as "cherub". That is what the discussion is about. The discussion is not about what a "cherub" is, but how you translate the original word into English when an English word that is equivalent to it does not exist.

[_SteelHead]

So you are saying there was some useful beast in the western hemisphere for which there was no English word equivalent in 1830. Can you give an example?