Themis wrote:OK what you are doing here is saying I am correct in my opinion of having no evidence of a cipher being used by some ancient person in Egypt. Sure you can also speculate that God wants to hide the evidence to promote faith. DCP does this all the time. I never liked it though. What value is it to ask someone to believe something for which they have no good evidence for? It's no different then frauds asking the same thing. Does God really want blind faith? Does God really think blind faith is a great trait?
I didn't say that. I just said that I do have evidence, maybe just not as much as you want to see. I believe I have enough to make the claims that I make. I think you differ on that. And furthermore, I don't think that you have personally scrutinized my claims to see if you really can dismiss them. I think there is a big chasm between what I'm doing and what DCP and his lemmings do.
You kinda did though because you were making excuses that maybe God wanted us not to have good evidence to promote more faith. Blind faith really which makes sense how?
Now where in your blog do you show evidence that someone in the past really did make a cipher?
Themis wrote: You kinda did though because you were making excuses that maybe God wanted us not to have good evidence to promote more faith. Blind faith really which makes sense how?
Now where in your blog do you show evidence that someone in the past really did make a cipher?
Actually, I do show that, but you wouldn't know that because it seems that you didn't scrutinize it. I specifically show where the Coptics did it, as one example.
Themis wrote: You kinda did though because you were making excuses that maybe God wanted us not to have good evidence to promote more faith. Blind faith really which makes sense how?
Now where in your blog do you show evidence that someone in the past really did make a cipher?
Actually, I do show that, but you wouldn't know that because it seems that you didn't scrutinize it. I specifically show where the Coptics did it, as one example.
I'm not looking for it being possible for ancients to make a cipher. I doubt many will think they didn't or couldn't. I am asking for evidence that someone did for the papyri in Joseph's possession.
Maksutov wrote: Great exchange. One thing I would like to add is that Mormon leaders actually *have* tended to believe in things like Ouija boards, just that they have been a conduit for "evil spirits".
Mormon culture is open to all kinds of paranormal notions and movements, as a jaunt through the LDS Freedom Forum can show.
My experience is that more Mormons believed this about things like Ouija boards in the past then they do today. People in Joseph's day were big believers in this kind of thing which is why he could get a good following based on using things like seer stones. More people used to believe in diving rods, but you have a hard time finding many today. This is the same with people in the church, and it creates a problem when they start thinking about Joseph using seer stones. Then add in his treasure seeking and it becomes pretty hard for many Mormons not to see an obvious link to fraudulent.
My problem is not my belief in seer stones or divining rods. My problem is whether members of the Church have authority to use them, or if the authority only resides in the leadership. I wouldn't mind having the "gift of the rod" myself, if only I knew that I had authorization.
Themis wrote:I'm not looking for it being possible for ancients to make a cipher. I doubt many will think they didn't or couldn't. I am asking for evidence that someone did for the papyri in Joseph's possession.
I know you are. Like I said. You aren't necessarily satisfied with what I do have. You aren't satisfied by the fact that I demonstrate the evidence from reverse engineering of the KEP of that very cipher. That's ok I guess. I am content with what I have and have done.
Themis wrote:I'm not looking for it being possible for ancients to make a cipher. I doubt many will think they didn't or couldn't. I am asking for evidence that someone did for the papyri in Joseph's possession.
I know you are. Like I said. You aren't necessarily satisfied with what I do have. You aren't satisfied by the fact that I demonstrate the evidence from reverse engineering of the KEP of that very cipher. That's ok I guess. I am content with what I have and have done.
I don't recall you demonstrating that it is a cipher by showing how it works. It's not much of a cipher by just assigning text to different hieroglyphs. Where did you reverse engineer it?
Themis wrote: I don't recall you demonstrating that it is a cipher by showing how it works. It's not much of a cipher by just assigning text to different hieroglyphs. Where did you reverse engineer it?
In a number of places in the blog, I have shown various examples, but here is one that is a step-by-step example that demonstrates the thing and leads the reader through every concept. And I identify the principles of the linkages between the symbols and the meaning assignments.
EdGoble wrote: My problem is not my belief in seer stones or divining rods. My problem is whether members of the Church have authority to use them, or if the authority only resides in the leadership. I wouldn't mind having the "gift of the rod" myself, if only I knew that I had authorization.
When I say problem, I don't mean a problem for all Mormons. Just some. The problem is how Mormons view today the occult and crystal balls, Ouija boards, diving rods, etc then Mormons and others did in the past. It's easier for many to see who this looks like fraud.
EdGoble wrote: My problem is not my belief in seer stones or divining rods. My problem is whether members of the Church have authority to use them, or if the authority only resides in the leadership. I wouldn't mind having the "gift of the rod" myself, if only I knew that I had authorization.
Ah, but you should be very interested in them. Because they may be examples of alien technology, according to your theory, correct?
EdGoble wrote: My problem is not my belief in seer stones or divining rods. My problem is whether members of the Church have authority to use them, or if the authority only resides in the leadership. I wouldn't mind having the "gift of the rod" myself, if only I knew that I had authorization.
When I say problem, I don't mean a problem for all Mormons. Just some. The problem is how Mormons view today the occult and crystal balls, Ouija boards, diving rods, etc then Mormons and others did in the past. It's easier for many to see who this looks like fraud.
Right. That's the faith test for the 21st Century Mormon.