Yeah, but again it is the whole idea of giving limited objective evidence. I can make sense of the props for Joseph. But if we need some physical "evidence" then leave us the plates.
I mean, either show us the props, or they don't have much meaning. I'm sure you can argue "witnesses" but then we're not asked to put our faith in the plates, or even in the message but put our faith in those people.
To me either you make it objective (ie. show us the plates) or you make it based on spiritual witness (ie Moroni 10) Yeah, Joseph needed props to boost his faith. If we need the same props then show us, if not then why bother showing only a select few?
Again, what I don't get is this idea of limited objectivity.
In retrospect, the thing that bothered me most
-
_Gazelam
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5659
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am
Do you need the Garden of Eden to believe in Adam?
Do you need the Ark to believe in Noah?
Do you need the Ten Commandments to believe in Moses?
Do you need the cross to believe in Christ?
Why do you need the plates to believe in Joseph?
What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?
Do you need the Ark to believe in Noah?
Do you need the Ten Commandments to believe in Moses?
Do you need the cross to believe in Christ?
Why do you need the plates to believe in Joseph?
What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
-
_Guardiands
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:26 am
"Do you need the Garden of Eden to believe in Adam?
Do you need the Ark to believe in Noah?
Do you need the Ten Commandments to believe in Moses?
Do you need the cross to believe in Christ?
Why do you need the plates to believe in Joseph?
What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?"
More to the point, if Jim Bob told me he'd seen the Garden of Eden, but I can't see it, but I should take his word for it, does that make it then more believable?
If Jim Bob tells me he saw the ark, but that I can't see it and that I need to take his word for it, does that make it more believable?
If Jim Bob told me he saw the cross, but I can't see it, does that make it any more believable?
If Jim Bob saw the plates, but told me that I can't see it, does that make it any believable?
The answer to all the above, for me, is no.
The point here is that these "witnesses" for the plates really do nothing to further the evidence of the Book of Mormon. It is like someone couldn't make up their mind: Do we rely on faith or do we produce objective evidence? Moroni 10 or witnesses? What role do these witnesses even play? Our testimony comese from the Holy Ghost, correct? We are told to pray and get a witness.
Again, be objective and give us the plates, or just tell us to rely on a spiritual witness. Don't try to claim that you have objective evidence, provide it for like 17 people and tell everyone else to take their word for it.
Do you need the Ark to believe in Noah?
Do you need the Ten Commandments to believe in Moses?
Do you need the cross to believe in Christ?
Why do you need the plates to believe in Joseph?
What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?"
More to the point, if Jim Bob told me he'd seen the Garden of Eden, but I can't see it, but I should take his word for it, does that make it then more believable?
If Jim Bob tells me he saw the ark, but that I can't see it and that I need to take his word for it, does that make it more believable?
If Jim Bob told me he saw the cross, but I can't see it, does that make it any more believable?
If Jim Bob saw the plates, but told me that I can't see it, does that make it any believable?
The answer to all the above, for me, is no.
The point here is that these "witnesses" for the plates really do nothing to further the evidence of the Book of Mormon. It is like someone couldn't make up their mind: Do we rely on faith or do we produce objective evidence? Moroni 10 or witnesses? What role do these witnesses even play? Our testimony comese from the Holy Ghost, correct? We are told to pray and get a witness.
Again, be objective and give us the plates, or just tell us to rely on a spiritual witness. Don't try to claim that you have objective evidence, provide it for like 17 people and tell everyone else to take their word for it.
-
_MormonMendacity
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:56 am
Gazelam wrote:Do you need the Garden of Eden to believe in Adam?
Yes, because neither have any evidence to support them. Having one would help confirm the other.
Gazelam wrote:Do you need the Ark to believe in Noah?
Again, both are unsubstantiated claims. If one is offered as supporting evidence for the other then we should at least be able to examine one of them!
Gazelam wrote:Do you need the Ten Commandments to believe in Moses?
See my previous comments. The Ten Commandments are not really helpful suggestions...but that is a topic for another thread.
Gazelam wrote:Do you need the cross to believe in Christ?
Not much evidence for either, but you're right: the cross could just be two sticks of wood put together to support the story. The story is already very dubious without claiming you have a sliver from the cross.
Gazelam wrote:Why do you need the plates to believe in Joseph?
Because he claimed he had them and won't let anyone see them. If it weren't about religion and someone wanted to sell you something sight-unseen, you'd certainly balk at it. I think it's reasonable to wonder why he talked about so many facts with so many proofs without allowing anyone to examine them. He thought he got away with it several other times, like with Kinderhook and Book of Abraham, and now the apologists have to develop excruciating explanations for them.
Gazelam wrote:What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?
Nothing, and they're probably not true. They all sound like fools-gold to me. Only the very naïve or gullible buy them as true without supporting evidence.
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder" --Homer Simpson's version of Pascal's Wager
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
-
_Runtu
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 16721
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am
MormonMendacity wrote:Gazelam wrote:What tells you the others are true as opposed to Joseph and the Plates?
Nothing, and they're probably not true. They all sound like fools-gold to me. Only the very naïve or gullible buy them as true without supporting evidence.
The big difference, in my opinion, is that there is no evidence one way or the other about Jesus or Moses. With Joseph Smith, you have not only the Kinderhook episode but the Book of Abraham as solid evidence against his being a translator. Coupled with the anachronisms and textual problems in the Book of Mormon, and you at least have reason to be suspicious. Real prophets don't create fake translations and try to pass them off as scripture, do they?
-
_Guardiands
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:26 am
Mormons and christians both have their apologists that can rationalize anything.
Yeah, there is a lot of stuff claimed in the Bible the I'm not taking someone's word for. Like water to wine. Nah, i'd rather not just "believe you" cause you said so. Raised from the dead? Millions of jew slaves leaving egypt? nah, I'm not taking your word on that, it goes against empirical data, just as empirical as egyptologists that prove the book of abraham false....that's a whole new can though and shows a misunderstanding of how joseph used the word translate (JST anyone? english to english?)....but there we go, I'm using an apologists approach, just as christians can with some of my claims above.
It's all the same, either you ask us to rely on a spiritual witness or you're wasting our time. Objectively christianity and Mormonism both equally are found lacking.
Edit: the "our" and "you" were not specified to any individuals, but just used in a general sense.
Yeah, there is a lot of stuff claimed in the Bible the I'm not taking someone's word for. Like water to wine. Nah, i'd rather not just "believe you" cause you said so. Raised from the dead? Millions of jew slaves leaving egypt? nah, I'm not taking your word on that, it goes against empirical data, just as empirical as egyptologists that prove the book of abraham false....that's a whole new can though and shows a misunderstanding of how joseph used the word translate (JST anyone? english to english?)....but there we go, I'm using an apologists approach, just as christians can with some of my claims above.
It's all the same, either you ask us to rely on a spiritual witness or you're wasting our time. Objectively christianity and Mormonism both equally are found lacking.
Edit: the "our" and "you" were not specified to any individuals, but just used in a general sense.
-
_Guardiands
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:26 am
By not taking your word, or Oliver Cowdery's word or some guy named "Mark's" word when they tell me things that can't be replicated, I therefore believe in nothing? Quite the jump you have made there.
No, I quite assuredly believe in something.
you mean realm of religion? I'm LDS, but as you can guess I'm not sure that I accept my metaphysical/mystical/holy ghost experiences as trustworthy. They're there, they happened, but who hasn't had some experience attesting that their belief is true?
No, I quite assuredly believe in something.
you mean realm of religion? I'm LDS, but as you can guess I'm not sure that I accept my metaphysical/mystical/holy ghost experiences as trustworthy. They're there, they happened, but who hasn't had some experience attesting that their belief is true?
-
_MormonMendacity
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:56 am
Gazelam wrote:What faith do you have? You believe in nothing?
Of course I believe in many things but I do not think faith is a useful thing.
Can you give me a reason to have faith and a practical application of it that I can agree with?
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder" --Homer Simpson's version of Pascal's Wager
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
-
_Gazelam
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5659
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am
The Holy Ghost
I see the root of the problem. It comes from a misconception of how the Holy Ghost functions. This is a common and easily understandable problem. I don't mean to say this in a smart-alec or condecending way, this is really a common misunderstanding.
Rule #1 The Holy Ghost is always accompanied by knowledge. The Holy Ghost has the title of comforter, and he does cause good feelings, but those feeling will be accompanied by pure intelligence flowing into you.
Rule #2 The revelations received are edifying (D&C 50:23) What you will find is that the Holy Ghost creates links to the knowledge you previously possesed. This ties into the concept that the Holy Ghost will "bring all things to your remembrance".
Hope this helps
Gaz
Rule #1 The Holy Ghost is always accompanied by knowledge. The Holy Ghost has the title of comforter, and he does cause good feelings, but those feeling will be accompanied by pure intelligence flowing into you.
Rule #2 The revelations received are edifying (D&C 50:23) What you will find is that the Holy Ghost creates links to the knowledge you previously possesed. This ties into the concept that the Holy Ghost will "bring all things to your remembrance".
Hope this helps
Gaz
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato