Please Explain how Joseph Smith could have possibly authored the Book of Mormon.

[SoyLeche]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

And someone wrote that they saw it and you believe it.

Yes, they wrote what they saw, and yes, I believe it. I don't believe it because they wrote it, or even because they saw it though.

Where are these gold plates?

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by SoyLeche

Yes, they wrote what they saw, and yes, I believe it. I don't believe it because they wrote it, or even because they saw it though.

Do you believe as a matter of faith?

[SoyLeche]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

Do you believe as a matter of faith?

In part.

I'm sure the questions you are going to bring up now have been dealt with many times already, so I'm going to leave it at that. This particular tangent isn't all that relevant to the topic of the thread anyway.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by SoyLeche

In part.

I'm sure the questions you are going to bring up now have been dealt with many times already, so I'm going to leave it at that.

No, I always try not to question faith. Its your faith and your beliefs and if your not knocking on my door or infringing on the freedoms of others then they truly are your beliefs and your welcome to them.

I generally have a problem with people who say there is scientific proof or evidence for their faith when there is none. Thats dishonest. Even if you really, really believe it you have no evidence and to tell me you know. You can tell me you believe this and this is why and I have no problem with that but you cant tell me you know. Thats lying and immoral. People who come to my door and claim they know the truth are arrogant as there is *NO* way they could know. Again if they want to tell me this is what they believe then I have no problem.

[SoyLeche]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

No, I always try not to question faith. Its your faith and your beliefs and if your not knocking on my door or infringing on the freedoms of others then they truly are your beliefs and your welcome to them.

I generally have a problem with people who say there is scientific proof or evidence for their faith when there is none. Thats dishonest. Even if you really, really believe it you have no evidence and to tell me you know. You can tell me you believe this and this is why and I have no problem with that but you cant tell me you know. Thats lying and immoral. People who come to my door and claim they know the truth are arrogant as there is *NO* way they could know. Again if they want to tell me this is what they believe then I have no problem.

I can accept that. I will tell you, though - that I do in fact know, and I do not have any evidence that will convince you. I am able to accept evidence that you would likely reject. If you must believe that I am dishonest in saying that, then so be it.

Again, though - not the purpose of this thread. This thread is here for you and others to present alternative theories about the origin of the Book of Mormon.

As we currently stand we have the unbelievable story that Joseph told and a couple other unbelievable theories (it all came out of his head and he just happened to get so much right, for example). If all we've got to go with is a bunch of unbelievable theories, then I don't see why yours is any better than mine.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by SoyLeche

I can accept that. I will tell you, though - that I do in fact know, and I do not have any evidence that will convince you. I am able to accept evidence that you would likely reject. If you must believe that I am dishonest in saying that, then so be it.

Again, though - not the purpose of this thread. This thread is here for you and others to present alternative theories about the origin of the Book of Mormon.

As we currently stand we have the unbelievable story that Joseph told and a couple other unbelievable theories (it all came out of his head and he just happened to get so much right, for example). If all we've got to go with is a bunch of unbelievable theories, then I don't see why yours is any better than mine.

That the point really... He got most of it wrong. Talking at each other isn't a discussion. Have read any of my earlier posts or even this link which I will post again: Secular Web Kiosk and Bookstore :: Three Strikes, You're Out!--The Quick and Dirty Case Against Mormonism

I listened, read up on chiasmus, spoke with a mormon friend to clarify my view and he says its a matter of faith and I agree with him.

Now I do want to correct you. You said you have evidence but the evidence you have is hear say. Someone said something or wrote something down and thats your evidence. You accept that. Which is fine. The correction is accepting your evidence still does not prove to anyone that you can KNOW it. Where is the proof? You still just believe based on faith. You don't know for sure that what you believe is certain. To claim you do know is what I find dishonest.

Mormon's, like most religious folk, always think they are good people and their religion can do no harm. History teaches otherwise of course, but as I have brought up Mormons currently have a very repressive doctrine towards sexuality, espcially homosexuality and it is incumbent on me from a moral stand point to speak against that. Now its just one repressive belief. Mormon's in particular dont believe R rated movies should be viewed by adults... Its incumbant on me again to point out this censorship. Even if its self enforced and you can break the rules it keeps the general mass out of touch with reality. Many important issues are not G rated.

Mormons go door to door spreading their theory as truth. I disagree with this. You have a theory and thats what you should be telling people if your honest. To spread your theory as absolute truth door to door is dishonest. You may not intentionally try to be dishonest but if a man accidentally kills someone because he was driving drunk and really didn't see that pedestrian because he had passed out he still commited the crime of murder and mormons who tell me they know the truth and start their tirade of celestial and telestial heavens and gold plates that were magically spirited away are being dishonest. And I have no problem telling them that online or face to face. To wit, some LDS members agree with me. Some Non-LDS members disagree with me. Thats your and their right.

I'm not going to argue against the mormon religion as a whole... I may argue against all religion as a whole or to be more honest most religion but thats for another thread.

You equate your fantastical story which includes 1000 pound gold plates, angels and past prophets reappearing to give Joe the... the word escapes me... whatever the power and right to baptize others truely to a realistic alternative that does not include gods, angels and other fantastic and unproven events.

Such to me is lunacy. They are obviously not equal in terms of reality and only someone who is prone to believe is such things would agree with you. If I went to school and told the teacher I didn't do my homework because I was up all night digging up gold plates that were the word of god and then could not produce such plates with the story of an angel that appeared and spirited them away, I doubt in my public school, not private, catholic or otherwise, she or he would believe such.

The content of the BoM is equally fake unless it is taken allegorically or as a fictional tale of morals much like Aesops. There is no DNA or Archelogical proof for the work as a whole and no amount of poetry found in the book will change that. Again read the link I sent you and you have a response I will listen and respond.

[Tyr]

drugs or some kind of hallucinigin taken by a man who may have already had a weak mind

[SoyLeche]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

Now I do want to correct you. You said you have evidence but the evidence you have is hear say. Someone said something or wrote something down and thats your evidence.

No, actually, it's not. That isn't my evidence at all. That wouldn't be anywhere near enough.