The Bible and Book of Mormon agree, God created everything E

[_ludwigm]

The Book of Mormon is a product of pious fraud?

Both it and the Bible are, to varying degrees, the product of pious fraud.

I suggest to you that "pious fraud" is an oxymoron that contradicts itself. One cannot be pious if one Is in the habit of deception. God tells us that lying is wrong.
/ˈpīəs/
adjective: pious
devoutly religious.
synonyms: religious, devout, God-fearing, churchgoing, spiritual, prayerful, holy, godly, saintly, dedicated, reverent, dutiful, righteous
"a pious family"

Sorry, LittleNipper... the word religious and the word fraud are hard linked.

Pious fraud (Latin: pia fraus) is used to describe fraud in religion or medicine. A pious fraud can be counterfeiting a miracle or falsely attributing a sacred text to a biblical figure due to the belief that the "end justifies the means", in this case the end of increasing faith by whatever means available.

Pia fraus

The Oxford English Dictionary reports the phrase was first used in English in 1678. Edward Gibbon was particularly fond of the phrase, using it often in his monumental and controversial work The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in which he criticized the likelihood of some of the martyrs and miracles of the early Christian church.

See Joseph Smith ...

[_The Erotic Apologist]

I suggest to you that "pious fraud" is an oxymoron that contradicts itself. One cannot be pious if one Is in the habit of deception. God tells us that lying is wrong.


/ˈpīəs/

adjective: pious

devoutly religious.

synonyms: religious, devout, God-fearing, churchgoing, spiritual, prayerful, holy, godly, saintly, dedicated, reverent, dutiful, righteous
"a pious family"

Nipper, if lying is wrong then why do you and certain other xians resort to deceptive tactics when attempting to evangelize nonbelievers?

Why do you attempt to change the subject when asked about your deceptive tactics?

And why are you never able to admit it when you don't know the answer to a given question? (Would you agree that pretending to know something when you clearly don't is a form of deception?)

[_LittleNipper]

I suggest to you that "pious fraud" is an oxymoron that contradicts itself. One cannot be pious if one Is in the habit of deception. God tells us that lying is wrong.


/ˈpīəs/

adjective: pious

devoutly religious.

synonyms: religious, devout, God-fearing, churchgoing, spiritual, prayerful, holy, godly, saintly, dedicated, reverent, dutiful, righteous
"a pious family"

Nipper, if lying is wrong then why do you and certain other xians resort to deceptive tactics when attempting to evangelize nonbelievers?

Why do you attempt to change the subject when asked about your deceptive tactics?

And why are you never able to admit it when you don't know the answer to a given question? (Would you agree that pretending to know something when you clearly don't is a form of deception?)

Actually, I believe that you resort to all sorts of tricks and underhanded tactics in order to make the Bible and anyone who places their faith in it look silly. You do not seem to be asking questions to learn anything ---- only to misdirect, confuse, and hinder. When I believe I am wrong, I will demonstrate where I failed. It seems to me that when you are wrong, that you simply jump to another question in order to redirect the attention or bury it. I believe that I have treated everyone on this board far more courteously than you yourself ever treated me. I must admit that you never said that you are a Christian and in fact you do not act like Christ. In that regard you are predictable.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Actually, I believe that you resort to all sorts of tricks and underhanded tactics in order to make the Bible and anyone who places their faith in it look silly.

You're correct except for one small detail--this is how I treat Bibical literalists, like you. I generally don't have a problem with anybody else.

I don't need to resort to "tricks and underhanded tactics" to make Biblical literalists look silly. They do a good job of that all by themselves--like when they claim Chinese characters contain evidence supporting the Biblical account of the Great Flood. Or when they reject the notion that Martin Luther's anti-Antisemitism laid the intellectual foundation for the Holocaust. Or when they claim President Obama is making homo-demons posses white men so they'll steal black men away from their wives.

You do not seem to be asking questions to learn anything ---- only to misdirect, confuse, and hinder.

On the contrary, I've learned a great deal from you and from all the other Biblical literalists I've spoken with.

When I believe I am wrong, I will demonstrate where I failed.

Do you have any clear and specific examples of where you've done this?

It seems to me that when you are wrong, that you simply jump to another question in order to redirect the attention or bury it.

Will you please provide a clear and specific example of where I've done this?

I believe that I have treated everyone on this board far more courteously than you yourself ever treated me.

This right here is a good example of what I'm talking about: You're pretending I asked you a question about courtesy when you know perfectly well my question was about deception. In other words, you're trying to give me the answer for 2 + 2 when you know I asked you for the answer for 3 + 3. This is precisely the behavior Mormon apostle Bob Millet talks about in his infamous "milk before meat" video on Youtube. See for yourself...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... zA-rZQB-xQ

Do you agree with me that this is a fundamentally deceptive tactic?

I must admit that you never said that you are a Christian and in fact you do not act like Christ. In that regard you are predictable.

If by that you mean to say I don't act like a Biblical literalist then yes, I agree with you.

[_LeVay]

Actually, I believe that you resort to all sorts of tricks and underhanded tactics in order to make the Bible and anyone who places their faith in it look silly.

You're correct except for one small detail--this is how I treat Bibical literalists, like you. I generally don't have a problem with anybody else.

I don't need to resort to "tricks and underhanded tactics" to make Biblical literalists look silly. They do a good job of that all by themselves--like when they claim Chinese characters contain evidence supporting the Biblical account of the Great Flood. Or when they reject the notion that Martin Luther's anti-Antisemitism laid the intellectual foundation for the Holocaust. Or when they claim President Obama is making homo-demons posses white men so they'll steal black men away from their wives.

Or when they spread rumors of a world-wide conspiracy of devil worshipers to kidnap and molest small children. I don't know about you, but I can only think of one world-wide church with a history of child molestation..........can you guess which church I'm thinking of? Hmmmmmmm?

[_LittleNipper]

It seems to me that when you are wrong, that you simply jump to another question in order to redirect the attention or bury it.

Will you please provide a clear and specific example of where I've done this?

I believe that I have treated everyone on this board far more courteously than you yourself ever treated me.

I asked you for the answer for 3 + 3.

The answer you are looking for is 6.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

The answer you are looking for is 6.

But you can't say whether you think your "milk before meat" tactics are deceptive?

You would make a very good Mormon.

[Guest]

The answer you are looking for is 6.

But you can't say whether you think your "milk before meat" tactics are deceptive?

You would make a very good Mormon.

I do not believe I'm forever married to my wife (not that I wouldn't want to be). I believe God always intended a man to have no more than one wife. I was born and will exist eternally from the point of my natural birth (I was never a spirit prior to being born on planet earth). I believe that Jesus fulfilled the roles of PROPHET, PRIEST and KING and that none others are now necessary, as Christ works through the Holy Spirit and the Bible to explain Himself to His elect brothers and sisters. And I do not believe God is presently telling us what his elect will be doing in the afterlife. It is his surprise gift. So, I would not make a good Mormon. So, was that "bread" or "milk?"

[_Bazooka]

I believe God always intended a man to have no more than one wife.

Oh. My. God.

What does your wife think of that proposition?

[_LittleNipper]

I believe God always intended a man to have no more than one wife.

Oh. My. God.

What does your wife think of that proposition?

Well, she is a Christian, I've never changed my stance of that Biblical value. And she has never asked for a divorce.