Once more, perhaps against my better judgement...we'll see...
Kerry,
I know that you're reading this thread. I happened to check in on MAD and saw your comments about this thread, the board and Kevin posting on your blog. I also read the exchanges between you and Kevin on your blog. I'm not willing to talk between boards or comment on your blog. Recently you made this comment on MAD:
That's the one. I have my very serious doubts there is any capability on that board of anyone dealing with the Biblical archaeological materials I used in the podcast. They are the finest biblical scholars in the world, so far as I am aware. And I certainly did not use the Graham methodology of reading a mere first few pages of each book and article either.
I listened to the first 23 minutes of your podcast. People can't deal with the material you presented if you avoid engaging them. You're registered on this board and why you're talking on MAD about this thread instead of participating in the thread itself, I have no clue. I am on this board and previously attempted to discuss at least some of the material in a thread on FAIR several months ago. When I began asking you questions, you refused to engage. Based on your above comments regarding the posters on this board...
now is your chance.
Again, I could only hear the first 23 minutes of your podcast so that's all I have to go on at the moment. Here are the areas I would choose to challenge you on:
1. Whatever archaeological evidence you can or have presented to support the idea of God having a body, doesn't prove that at all. What it does, Kerry, is prove that human beings thought that God had a body and wrote about that concept or made carvings or statues of God with a body in order to express it. They are no more accurate representations of God than the artists renderings of Christ. They are merely artistic interpretations.
2. The story of the Caananite God "El" stems directly from Baalism. Baalism is clearly condemned in the Bible. In order to support the theory of God having a body (unless you're discussing Jesus Christ) which would lead one to believe that you're attempting to make a connection between ancient Baalism and Mormonism, what you're doing is replacing Christian theological concepts with the concepts found in the fertilitity religion of Baal which is again, clearly condemned in the Bible.
3. It is my opinion, and only my opinion, that this is a dangerous and slippery slope for an LDS apologist to set out on. It seems to me that you are faced with a choice between supporting Christian concepts or Baalism. Should the choice be to support Baalism, are you willing to put your belief in Jesus Christ aside and accept fertility pantheons, temple sexual rituals (including homosexual acts) and infant sacrifice?
There is your serious reply. Ball is in your court.
Jersey Girl