So instead of managing MG’s poor behaviour to come into line with the board’s rules, you’ve rewritten the board’s rules to come into line with MG’s poor behaviour.
I’m dumbfounded.
This is the link and run that started it off
That doesn’t meet even the new “MG Amendment” to the board rule.
He does not describe what is at the end of the link - a company selling a book. He does not describe in sufficient detail its content for readers to decide if it’s worth their while clicking on it, because he doesn’t explain that it’s not a link to the books content, it’s just a link to an online book seller. There’s no “content” at the end of the link. He doesn’t explain readers would have to buy it to access the content that’s supposedly relevant to the discussion.
It clearly, and obviously fails to meet even your newly diluted rule.
He says the other end contains a book, then he indicates the book is about a scientist who converted to Christianity, so I disagree with you about it failing to meet even my newly diluted rule.
Is it perfect? No. Does it contain enough information for us to make an informed decision whether it's worth our time to click on it? Yes.
I think that many here will be a bit more careful about our posts and making sure we don't fall into the "link and run" mode. I've seen others besides myself do the same thing. Honestly? I think it is something that we do sometimes without thinking about it. I know I'm going to be more careful.
Thanks to IHQ for making a big deal out of it. That he would voice his concern in admirable. He must have known he might get some pushback.
It is sometimes claimed that complexity of the Book of Mormon shows Joseph did not invent it. My familiarity with the book has faded over the years so I am hoping some with lots of familiarity like Shulem could reflect on whether there is much complexity.
My faded impression is there is not much theological development, there are cycles of loss and gain of faith. With these cycles there are also lots of wars for vague reasons.
Perhaps one can say the book is complex because a lot of actions are described. Am I wrong to think this is mostly add on repetition of a few themes? Complexity might be how subsequent events depend upon perhaps multiple past threads of events.
Are there patterns of events an author such as Joseph might be would have trouble tracking without getting confused?
Let’s get back to the topic in question.
One element against the notion that the Book of Mormon is complex in a consistent manner, is the narrative about the indigenous population in the land that Nephi supposedly traveled to - The Americas. The book claims it was an uninhabited land. Yet within the book it relates the story of the Jaredites and the Mulekites who both supposedly travelled, at separate times, settled there prior to Nephi’s group. So which is it, a land that was kept uninhabited, or a land that was already settled by the Jaredites and then the Mulekites?
Is that complexity, or is that Joseph not keeping his story straight?
The Book of Mormon is consistently bad.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
One element against the notion that the Book of Mormon is complex in a consistent manner, is the narrative about the indigenous population in the land that Nephi supposedly traveled to - The Americas. The book claims it was an uninhabited land. Yet within the book it relates the story of the Jaredites and the Mulekites who both supposedly travelled, at separate times, settled there prior to Nephi’s group. So which is it, a land that was kept uninhabited, or a land that was already settled by the Jaredites and then the Mulekites?
Is that complexity, or is that Joseph not keeping his story straight?
