Jonny vs. Barnabus - One-on-one Debate

jonny · Apr 18, 2006

[FONT=&quot]With all this against Joseph Smiths office of prophet, one must ask how holy was this "Holy Spirit" which you claim has given you revelation? [/FONT]

I'm not going to debate the validity of my spiritual experiences. I can't imagine anything more blasphemous. I have my own views on determining whether or not something comes from God and it doesn't require your imput.

That being said, I don't believe you've adequately shown that Joseph Smith could not be a prophet. In fact, you haven't offered any proof that he couldn't be. The only thing you've presented are beliefs that you disagree with and revelations that you don't understand.

jonny · Apr 18, 2006

[FONT=&quot]"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."[/FONT]

Thankfully, God had a plan which included restoring the gospel so that people would again hear the truth. Did it ever occur to you that this scripture could be referring to YOU?

jonny · Apr 18, 2006

barnabus said:
In regards to your earlier statements concerning this spiritual revelation concerning the Book of Mormon, as well as the supposed righteousness of Joseph Smith.

"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him...For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." 2 Corinthians 11:4, 13-15

Could you elaborate on this? I'm done responding to everything for now.

barnabus · Apr 18, 2006

For the sake of coherency I shall summarize my arguement.

Point 1

Through out the New Testament we are warned against false prophets.

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many."
Matthew 24:11
"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."
Matthew 24:24
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."
2 Peter 2:1

First and for most, from these verses we can gather that indeed false prophets will arise and shall deceive many(not just a few here and there), and that they will perform great signs and wonders. They are coming, most likely some have already arrived, and they will delude and they will mislead. And the deception will be all to subtle and secret. Keep that in mind.

How may we recognize these false prophets, these false teachers?

Point 2

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:8

Now then, Mormon doctrine teaches that an angel, Moroni, gave a revelation to Joseph Smith concerning another gospel. My doesn't that sound familiar...
In doctrine or not, technically the the Book of Mormon is another gospel. You yourself have told me that your belief in baptism for the dead springs from more latter day revelation. Not only does scientific evidence refute any kind of civilization as that described as inhabiting America in the Book of Mormon, it give concrete evidence of a totally different civilization in its place. I have the funny feeling such an idea as proposed by the Book of Mormon had no place in the teachings of the primitive Church.

Now then. We know that false prophets are going come. We know also that supposedly an angel appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him this revelation. And we know that the Book of Mormon adds to the gospels.

I would ask that you give me time to finish my summary before posting. An appointment has arisen, but I will finish this passage promptly upon my return.

barnabus · Apr 18, 2006

In review: False prophets will arise and many will be deceived.(Matt 11:11,24;2 Peter 2:1) We are not to believe further gospels proposed by anyone, angel of light or otherwise. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15;Galatians 1:8) If I get Mormon doctrine right, and angel supposedly appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him the revelation of the Book of Mormon. And regardless of similarities, the Book of Mormon is an addition to the for mentioned gospels.

Point 3

There are the archaelogical and biological problems present in the Book of Mormon. If you so desire I can go into these in more detail.

Point 4

I no you must be tired of hearing this, but there are the prophesies of Joseph Smith himself.

"Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart."
Jeremiah 14:14
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Deuteronomy 18:22

What I get from this is that false prophecy is a sure sign, if there is such a thing, of a false prophet. I have done some more research on the matter and am anxious to put it up to your criticism. In any case, if Smith's prophesies do not come true I should not mind him.

"President Smith, in concluding his remarks, said that if the government, which received into its coffers the money of citizens for its public lands, while its officials are rolling in the luxury at the expense of its public treasury, cannot protect such citizens in their lives and property, it is an old granny anyhow; and I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunger and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrated a foul and corroding blot upon the fair name of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame. Judge, you will aspire to the presidency of the United States; and if ever you turn your hand against me or the Latter-day Saints, you will feel the weight of the hand of Almighty upon you; and you will live to see and know that I have testified the truth to you; for the conversation of this day will stick to you through life."
History of the Church, vol. 5, pg. 394, May 1843

To my knowledge the United States never apologized for anything to the Mormon Church. The United States in government was not overthrown. However, some of Mormons teach that the Civil War was the fulfillment of this prophecy. It was not because the United States government was not utterly overthrown and wasted. The Union was preserved. In fact, it is still here. (Yes, I am very much aware that this prophesy is not official church doctrine. But last time I checked, verses I have put forth are not limited to the "official" teachings of a prophet.)

Miscellaneous

Did you really just use a quote of Joseph Smith quoting Paul to prove your point? So, by your definition, I guess that Paul is also false prophet.

You are partly correct in this assumption. Indee Paul does speak of other gods and lords, but not in the same context as Smith.

As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
1 Corinthians 8:4-7

Considering how Paul was speaking of idols and the folly of those who worshiped them, it is reasonable to infer that he was speaking in such a context when he refers to there being many gods and many lords. Is it not logical to infer that the verse refers to the wide spread idolatry of the time?

The Bible tells us that there is only one God in all existence. However, it also mentions "other gods." For example there is Adrammelech and Anammelech, Asherah, Baal, Chemosh, Dagon, Molech. But given the context the Bible is not contradicting itself. When the Bible speaks of other gods it is speaking of false gods that have no true existence.

"Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods."
Galatians 4:8
"And have cast their gods into the fire: for they were no gods, but the work of men's hands, wood and stone: therefore they have destroyed them."
Isaiah 37:19
"Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit."
Jeremiah 2:11

God tells us that he alone is the true God and that all of the invented gods of man do not exist except in their own minds. So, we can see that the Bible is not contradicting itself regarding how many gods there are in existence. There is only one.

Let us compare this to the teachings of Joseph Smith.

"In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it."
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 5

"Hence, the doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine. It is all over the face of the Bible . . . Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many . . . but to us there is but one God--that is pertaining to us; and he is in all and through all..."
History of the Church, Vol. 6, page 474

Can you not see? Smith in referencing these remarks to Paul, he is making it seem as though other gods exist in truth, whereas everywhere else in the scriptures the concept of "other gods" is spoken of as a lie. Yes, there is one God pertaining to us, but that is because He is the only God!

Well that sums up my position as of the past few weeks.

jonny · Apr 19, 2006

Point 1

Through out the New Testament we are warned against false prophets.

"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many."
Matthew 24:11
"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."
Matthew 24:24
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."
2 Peter 2:1

First and for most, from these verses we can gather that indeed false prophets will arise and shall deceive many(not just a few here and there), and that they will perform great signs and wonders. They are coming, most likely some have already arrived, and they will delude and they will mislead. And the deception will be all to subtle and secret. Keep that in mind.

How may we recognize these false prophets, these false teachers?

I don't disagree with this first point at all.

Point 2

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:8

Now then, Mormon doctrine teaches that an angel, Moroni, gave a revelation to Joseph Smith concerning another gospel. My doesn't that sound familiar...
In doctrine or not, technically the the Book of Mormon is another gospel. You yourself have told me that your belief in baptism for the dead springs from more latter day revelation. Not only does scientific evidence refute any kind of civilization as that described as inhabiting America in the Book of Mormon, it give concrete evidence of a totally different civilization in its place. I have the funny feeling such an idea as proposed by the Book of Mormon had no place in the teachings of the primitive Church.

I already addressed this. Either you didn't read my answer or you completely ignored it. In order for this argument to carry any weight at all you need to demonstrate that the Book of Mormon contains another gospel. Technically, the Book of Mormon is not another gospel. It preaches the same gospel that is in the Bible. You have also failed to present all your evidence that scientifically refutes the Book of Mormon. Make your case if you're going to make a claim. Having "funny feelings" is not proof of anything except that you can't compse an argument. I suppose if you're just regurgitating things you find on anti-Mormon websites this might be difficult.

BTW, baptism for the dead isn't mentioned in the Book of Mormon. That revelation was based off scriptures that Joseph Smith was seeking to understand from the New Testament.

Now then. We know that false prophets are going come.

Yes.

We know also that supposedly an angel appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him this revelation. And we know that the Book of Mormon adds to the gospels.

No. You're twisting. The premise of your argument has got to be that the angel is not from God and that the gospel he is preaching is different that the ones that the Apostles taught. Whether or not the Book of Mormon "adds to the gospels" is irrelevant. You are putting limitations on God that he never placed on himself. Don't you believe that he is omnipotent?

Learning the history of this Bible should clear up any through you'd have that the scripture you're basing your claim on is referring to the "book" called the Bible. You do realize that when Paul was writing his letters that no such book existed, don't you? The scriptures are obviously referring to the "gospel" that is being taught, and not the way it is presented.

jonny · Apr 19, 2006

There are the archaelogical and biological problems present in the Book of Mormon. If you so desire I can go into these in more detail.

Please do. As I stated earlier, unless you do you have no case. Keep in mind, I've heard this all before and I've debated this topic before. Don't waste my time with claims of DNA evidence. I believe that the Book of Mormon lands were a limited geographic area. I don't believe that they covered the entire continent and I don't believe that every native who was here when Columbus arrived is related to the Lamanites. I believe that a good number of them came across from Asia. Keep this in mind when you are presenting your "evidence."

I've gotta run to work. I'll finish this up later.

barnabus · Apr 22, 2006

Have you finished responding, so that I may reply?

barnabus · Apr 22, 2006

Point 3-Scientific Problems within the Book of Mormon

Geographic
2 Nephi5:15:16 is self-contradictory about the presence of minerals.

1 Nephi 17:5 is a description of Arabia which is "called Bountiful because of its much fruit and also wild honey." Arabia is bountiful in sunshine, petroleum, sand, heat and fresh air, but certainly not in "much fruit and also wild honey", nor has it been since creation times. 1 Nephi 18:1 indicates that the Jews made a ship from ample timber of Arabia. The same objection above applies here.

1 Nephi 2:6-9 speaks of an Arabian river named Laman that flows continually into the
Red Sea! There has been no river whatever in Arabia in recorded history!

Furthermore, the numerous descriptions of the Nephite's new land cannot be correlated with any distinct geographic features of Meso-America such as lakes or rivers.

Zoological

Contrary to what 1 Nephi 18:25 asserts, North America had no cows, oxen, asses, horses or goats "for the use of man" between 600 BC and the time European colonists brought them.

Ether 2:2-3 and 5:4 explain that Jared and his family captured the birds, fish and bees, and gathered seeds with which they populated North America. But American birds and fish are distinctly different from Old World species. Honeybees were first introduced by Europeans.

Ether 9:18-19 contains several problems.First, it lists domestic cattle, oxen and cows as separate species! Second, these did not exist in the Americas at that time. Third,domestic swine did not exist here then. Fourth,horses, asses and elephants did not exist in America at that time. Prehistoric forms became extinct centuries earlier and were not "useful to man." Fifth, "cureloms" and "cumons!' are not identified by LIDS scholars. Yet, it would be most unlikely for such supposedly useful and common domestic animals to go extinct.

There are serious problems in the description of the behavior of poisonous snakes, etc. in Ether 9:30-34. First,the notion that snakes increase as a drought increases is contradicted by the fact that reptiles are particularly sensitive to heat and lack of water, and would die off faster than other animals. Second,even with the large population of modem America, only about twenty people die yearly by snakebite. It is certainly not realistic for Ether to claim that numerous people and animals were exterminated by snakes. Third,it is totally unlike sheep for all of them to flee in one direction. Fourth,it would not be realistic for sheep to be driven to the south by poisonous snakes, as there are many fewer snakes in the north. Fifth,snakes have never cooperated with one another in driving animals in any direction. Sixth,it would have been impossible for people to have eaten in such few days the countless animals that had been killed by the snakes. Seventh,Ether 10:21ff tells us that the land was densely covered with people, while Ether 10: 19 says that "the land was covered with animals of the forests." Ether 10: 12 speaks of raising much grain. All of this simply does not square with the idea of an epidemic of poisonous snakes. People, farming, and predatory animals will not allow snakes to become numerous.

Satyrs (2 Nephi 23:21) and dragons (2 Nephi 23:22,8:9) are mentioned as creatures (debatable still, I realize). Chickens (3 Nephi 10:4-6) and dogs (Alma 16:10, Mosiah 12:2, and 3 Nephi 7:8) were non-existent here at the time. In 3 Nephi 20:16 and 21:12, lions are described as 'beasts of the forests." Contrary to popular opinion and the Book of Mormon, lions do not live in forests or jungles. They live in savannas and veldts (few scattered trees) and lions never inhabited the Americas.

Silk is erroneously mentioned as being produced in the Americas at that time (1 Nephi 13:7, Alma 4:6 and Ether 9:1 7 and 10:24). But silkworm moths had not yet been introduced from Asia. Clothes moths are mentioned in 3 Nephi 13:19-20 and 27:32, yet there were no woolen garments for moths to attack, as sheep had not yet been introduced. Needless to say, clothes moths had not yet been introduced to North America.

Language
1 Nephi 1:2 and Mosiah 1:4 assert that the native language of the Hebrews in 600-91 BC was Egyptian. Mormon 9:32 differs in saying that it was Reformed Egyptian around 400 AD. However, it is well established that in 600 BC the Hebrews spoke Hebrew. As a result of the Babylonian Captivity (560-538 BC) Hebrew was reduced to the language of the scribes, priests and rabbis. Aramaic became the language of the Hebrews. Then, in 70 AD, Titus forced the Hebrews out of Palestine, and they acquired the languages of the nations to which they were scattered. The Hebrews had not spoken Egyptian since Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt many centuries earlier.

I have yet to find evidence of the existence of "Reformed Egyptian", nor a claim that the following words are Egyptian or Semitic at all: Shazar (1 Nephi 16:13-14), Irreantum (1 Nephi 17:5), deseret (for "bee' in Ether 2:3), Liahona (Alma 37:38), or other names that are unique to the Book of Mormon.

Technology
It is erroneous for a book supposedly written in North America at that timeto mention bellows (1 Nephi 17:11), fine steel bow, (1 Nephi 16:18) swords (2 Nephi 1:1 8, etc.), scimitars (Alma 2:12), sackcloth (2 Nephi 13:24, carts (2 Nephi 15:18,28) chariots (Alma 18:12; 20:6; 3 Nephi 21:14), numerous large buildings (Ether 10:5, etc.), many highways (Helaman 14:24), cement (Helaman 3:7-9), forts (Alma 48:8), a javelin (Alma 51:34), bushel (3 Nephi 12:15), breastplates (Mosiah 8:10), head plate and armor for the loins (Alma 46:13), compass (Alma 37:38, 44), spindles and spinning (Alma 37:40), sickles (Alma 26:5), yoke (1 Nephi 13:5), strong cords (Alma 26:29) a trumpet (3 Nephi 13:2), street corners (3 Nephi 13:5), chains (2 Nephi 1: 13, etc.), hoe (Ether 10:25), harp, tabret and viol (2 Nephi 15:12), plow (Ether 10:25), fuller's soap (3 Nephi 24:2), barns (3 Nephi 13:26) and candles (3 Nephi 8:21).

Botany
In 1 Nephi 18:24 (591 BC) we read that upon arrival, the Nephi and his followers planted the numerous seeds they had brought, and that the seeds "did grow exceedingly, wherefore we were blessed in abundance."

As is well known, the dominant crops of the Near East were grapes, olives, wheat, barley, figs, dates, flax, onions, leeks, garlic, beans, pomegranates, and sycamore figs, certain melons, various oranges, lemons and peaches. American crops such as potatoes, tobacco, blueberries, cranberries, eggplants and maize (our "corn") were unknown in the Old World until modern times.

There is no evidence whatever that the Near Eastern crops ever "did grow exceedingly ... in abundance" until modern Europeans brought them to the Americas. Admittedly, while modern European colonists did find grapes in the Americas, they are an entirely distinct species from that of the Old World.

Other problems are when 3 Nephi 18:18 speaks of wheat in the Americas in 34 AD. 1 Nephi 13:7, Alma 1:29, and 4:6, Helaman 6:13 and Ether 10:4 speak of linen (flax cloth). Barley is mentioned in Mosiah 9:9, figs in 3 Nephi 14:16 and olives in Jacob 5, 1 Nephi l7: 14, 15:7-16. None of these existed here at that time. "Neas" and "sheum" are mentioned in Mosiah 9:9 as two prominent and abundant plants. Yet, if they were so prominent and important, why are there no references to them in Old World literature, and why have they not survived?

Plant grafting is mentioned in 1 Nephi 15:16 and Jacob 5, yet there is no evidence that the Indians practiced this in 600 BC - 421 AD. Pruning is mentioned in 2 Nephi 15:6 and faces a similar problem. To describe seed and plant growth as "swelling" (Alma 32:28-34 and 33:23) is naive and grossly inaccurate. It reflects the error of preformationism (a discredited scientific hypothesis which held that the entire totality of the mature organism is contained in miniature in the seed).

Is such as this sufficient as far as science goes?

jonny · Apr 22, 2006

barnabus said:
Have you finished responding, so that I may reply?

I'm not done responding. The weather's been really nice so I haven't been at the computer any more than I have to. I'm not ignoring you, but I'll probably be waiting for a rainy day before I take the time to respond. I know that DeepShadow did a really interesting thread on the Book of Mormon. Maybe he could post a link to it. I think you'd be interested in it.

jonny · Apr 23, 2006

[FONT=&quot]I no you must be tired of hearing this, but there are the prophesies of Joseph Smith himself. [/FONT]

I am tired of hearing about it and I've already responded to the scripture. You haven't mentioned anything about disagreeing with my assessment so since I assume that you can read, I'll assume that you have no response. In fact, you haven't responded to anything I've presented, including the questions I've posed.

[FONT=&quot]What I get from this is that false prophecy is a sure sign, if there is such a thing, of a false prophet. I have done some more research on the matter and am anxious to put it up to your criticism. In any case, if Smith's prophesies do not come true I should not mind him.
[/FONT]

So far, you have not demonstrated any false prophesies of Joseph Smith.

[FONT=&quot]"President Smith, in concluding his remarks, said that if the government, which received into its coffers the money of citizens for its public lands, while its officials are rolling in the luxury at the expense of its public treasury, cannot protect such citizens in their lives and property, it is an old granny anyhow; and I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunger and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrated a foul and corroding blot upon the fair name of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame. Judge, you will aspire to the presidency of the United States; and if ever you turn your hand against me or the Latter-day Saints, you will feel the weight of the hand of Almighty upon you; and you will live to see and know that I have testified the truth to you; for the conversation of this day will stick to you through life."[/FONT]

So far, this is the closest you've come to actually finding a false prophesy. Unfortunately, Joseph Smith didn't write this down and probably wasn't alive when it was written down (which is the case with much of the History of the Church information). From the quote, I can't even tell if it is Joseph Smith making the prophesy. The author is obviously describing a situation Joseph Smith was in, but never attributes the prophesy to Joseph Smith. Can you tell me who the author of this is, or did they leave that out on this page on the internet: http://www.carm.org/lds/docs/HC_5_394.htm

That being said, let's assume that he did say it and it was a prophesy. You said:

To my knowledge the United States never apologized for anything to the Mormon Church. The United States in government was not overthrown. However, some of Mormons teach that the Civil War was the fulfillment of this prophecy. It was not because the United States government was not utterly overthrown and wasted. The Union was preserved. In fact, it is still here. (Yes, I am very much aware that this prophesy is not official church doctrine. But last time I checked, verses I have put forth are not limited to the "official" teachings of a prophet.)

There have been apologies given to the LDS church. The state of Illinois legislature released this statement:

"On behalf of the people of Illinois, I want to express our official regret for the events that occurred in the 1840s. Religious hate crimes perpetrated in the 19th century were wrong, just as they are today in the 21st century."

You can read an article about it in the New York Times.

The Gov. of Missouri apologized to the church when he presented a Governor's Executive Order that officially recinded the extermination order that had been issued when the saints were living in Missouri.

You might have a problem with the timeline. Joseph Smith said "a few years" in this quote. The apology wasn't until the 1970s. You could say that our time isn't God's time. Perhaps God, as he did with Jonah when Jonah prophesied the Ninevah would be destroyed, changed his mind. Are you prepared to say that Jonah was a false prophet? How about John? John said that his Revelation was on things that must "shortly come to pass." It's been 2000 years! In any case, it is obvious that the country was not destroyed.

There is one other condition in the prophesy. It is that they must punish those who committed the crimes. I honestly don't know enough about what happened after the Mormons left to comment on this.

I could comment further, but I've never read the History of the Church and don't have a copy of it that I could use to see more information on the context of this quote. I have never heard that the civil war was the fulfillment of this prophesy, but I suppose that is possible. I don't believe that the civil war was a punishment because of the way that the gov. of Missouri treated the Mormons.

Anyway, in my research I happened across the site where you are getting your information. This debate is officially over. I'm not going to "debate" with someone who copies and pastes crap from the Internet because he is not intelligent enough to make his own arguments. I can understand copying and pasting QUOTES, but I found your entire damn argument on a webpage on the internet.

PATHETIC

If you're going to PLAGARIZE your debates, at least give CARM credit. Ask Joeboonda if you want to know how I feel about debating people who are too pathetic to actually think for themselves. Is this where you got your conviction in your own beliefs, from believing everything that you read?

I'm not going to waste my time debating with someone who is dishonest. You've already shown your true colors and I'm not going to get dragged into another Joeboonda debate again.

Thanks for the fun.

jonny · Apr 23, 2006

[FONT=&quot]Well that sums up my position as of the past few weeks.[/FONT]

Your position? Right... Since when did you start writing for CARM.com? Is this what they teach you in your church? If that's the case...RUN!!! The last I knew, Satan was the father of lies.

jonny · Apr 23, 2006

I have requested that this thread be closed since I will not be partipating in it anymore. If there is another member of the LDS church who would like to debate someone who copies and pastes his arguments off other websites, I guess you can request that it be reopened.

jonny · Apr 23, 2006

barnabus said:
Point 3-Scientific Problems within the Book of Mormon

Geographic
2 Nephi5:15:16 is self-contradictory about the presence of minerals.

1 Nephi 17:5 is a description of Arabia which is "called Bountiful because of its much fruit and also wild honey." Arabia is bountiful in sunshine, petroleum, sand, heat and fresh air, but certainly not in "much fruit and also wild honey", nor has it been since creation times. 1 Nephi 18:1 indicates that the Jews made a ship from ample timber of Arabia. The same objection above applies here.

1 Nephi 2:6-9 speaks of an Arabian river named Laman that flows continually into the
Red Sea! There has been no river whateverin Arabia in recorded history!

Furthermore, the numerous descriptions of the Nephite's new land cannot be correlated with any distinct geographic features of Meso-America such as lakes or rivers.

Zoological

Contrary to what 1 Nephi 18:25 asserts, North America had no cows, oxen, asses, horses or goats "for the use of man" between 600 BC and the time European colonists brought them.

Ether 2:2-3 and 5:4 explain that Jared and his family captured the birds, fish and bees, and gathered seeds with which they populated North America. But American birds and fish are distinctly different from Old World species. Honeybees were first introduced by Europeans.

Ether 9:18-19 contains several problems.First, it lists domestic cattle, oxen and cows as separate species! Second, these did not exist in the Americas at that time. Third,domestic swine did not exist here then. Fourth,horses, asses and elephants did not exist in America at that time. Prehistoric forms became extinct centuries earlier and were not "useful to man." Fifth, "cureloms" and "cumons!' are not identified by LIDS scholars. Yet, it would be most unlikely for such supposedly useful and common domestic animals to go extinct.

There are serious problems in the description of the behavior of poisonous snakes, etc. in Ether 9:30-34. First,the notion that snakes increase as a drought increases is contradicted by the fact that reptiles are particularly sensitive to heat and lack of water, and would die off faster than other animals. Second,even with the large population of modem America, only about twenty people die yearly by snakebite. It is certainly not realistic for Ether to claim that numerous people and animals were exterminated by snakes. Third,it is totally unlike sheep for all of them to flee in one direction. Fourth,it would not be realistic for sheep to be driven to the south by poisonous snakes, as there are many fewer snakes in the north. Fifth,snakes have never cooperated with one another in driving animals in any direction. Sixth,it would have been impossible for people to have eaten in such few days the countless animals that had been killed by the snakes. Seventh,Ether 10:21ff tells us that the land was densely covered with people, while Ether 10: 19 says that "the land was covered with animals of the forests." Ether 10: 12 speaks of raising much grain. All of this simply does not square with the idea of an epidemic of poisonous snakes. People, farming, and predatory animals will not allow snakes to become numerous.

Satyrs (2 Nephi 23:21) and dragons (2 Nephi 23:22,8:9) are mentioned as creatures (debatable still, I realize). Chickens (3 Nephi 10:4-6) and dogs (Alma 16:10, Mosiah 12:2, and 3 Nephi 7:8) were non-existent here at the time. In 3 Nephi 20:16 and 21:12, lions are described as 'beasts of the forests." Contrary to popular opinion and the Book of Mormon, lions do not live in forests or jungles. They live in savannas and veldts (few scattered trees) and lions never inhabited the Americas.

Silk is erroneously mentioned as being produced in the Americas at that time (1 Nephi 13:7, Alma 4:6 and Ether 9:1 7 and 10:24). But silkworm moths had not yet been introduced from Asia. Clothes moths are mentioned in 3 Nephi 13:19-20 and 27:32, yet there were no woolen garments for moths to attack, as sheep had not yet been introduced. Needless to say, clothes moths had not yet been introduced to North America.

Language
1 Nephi 1:2 and Mosiah 1:4 assert that the native language of the Hebrews in 600-91 BC was Egyptian. Mormon 9:32 differs in saying that it was Reformed Egyptian around 400 AD. However, it is well established that in 600 BC the Hebrews spoke Hebrew. As a result of the Babylonian Captivity (560-538 BC) Hebrew was reduced to the language of the scribes, priests and rabbis. Aramaic became the language of the Hebrews. Then, in 70 AD, Titus forced the Hebrews out of Palestine, and they acquired the languages of the nations to which they were scattered. The Hebrews had not spoken Egyptian since Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt many centuries earlier.

I have yet to find evidence of the existence of "Reformed Egyptian", nor a claim that the following words are Egyptian or Semitic at all: Shazar (1 Nephi 16:13-14), Irreantum (1 Nephi 17:5), deseret (for "bee' in Ether 2:3), Liahona (Alma 37:38), or other names that are unique to the Book of Mormon.

Technology
It is erroneous for a book supposedly written in North America at that timeto mention bellows (1 Nephi 17:11), fine steel bow, (1 Nephi 16:18) swords (2 Nephi 1:1 8, etc.), scimitars (Alma 2:12), sackcloth (2 Nephi 13:24, carts (2 Nephi 15:18,28) chariots (Alma 18:12; 20:6; 3 Nephi 21:14), numerous large buildings (Ether 10:5, etc.), many highways (Helaman 14:24), cement (Helaman 3:7-9), forts (Alma 48:8), a javelin (Alma 51:34), bushel (3 Nephi 12:15), breastplates (Mosiah 8:10), head plate and armor for the loins (Alma 46:13), compass (Alma 37:38, 44), spindles and spinning (Alma 37:40), sickles (Alma 26:5), yoke (1 Nephi 13:5), strong cords (Alma 26:29) a trumpet (3 Nephi 13:2), street corners (3 Nephi 13:5), chains (2 Nephi 1: 13, etc.), hoe (Ether 10:25), harp, tabret and viol (2 Nephi 15:12), plow (Ether 10:25), fuller's soap (3 Nephi 24:2), barns (3 Nephi 13:26) and candles (3 Nephi 8:21).

Botany
In 1 Nephi 18:24 (591 BC) we read that upon arrival, the Nephi and his followers planted the numerous seeds they had brought, and that the seeds "did grow exceedingly, wherefore we were blessed in abundance."

As is well known, the dominant crops of the Near East were grapes, olives, wheat, barley, figs, dates, flax, onions, leeks, garlic, beans, pomegranates, and sycamore figs, certain melons, various oranges, lemons and peaches. American crops such as potatoes, tobacco, blueberries, cranberries, eggplants and maize (our "corn") were unknown in the Old World until modern times.

There is no evidence whatever that the Near Eastern crops ever "did grow exceedingly ... in abundance" until modern Europeans brought them to the Americas. Admittedly, while modern European colonists did find grapes in the Americas, they are an entirely distinct species from that of the Old World.

Other problems are when 3 Nephi 18:18 speaks of wheat in the Americas in 34 AD. 1 Nephi 13:7, Alma 1:29, and 4:6, Helaman 6:13 and Ether 10:4 speak of linen (flax cloth). Barley is mentioned in Mosiah 9:9, figs in 3 Nephi 14:16 and olives in Jacob 5, 1 Nephi l7: 14, 15:7-16. None of these existed here at that time. "Neas" and "sheum" are mentioned in Mosiah 9:9 as two prominent and abundant plants. Yet, if they were so prominent and important, why are there no references to them in Old World literature, and why have they not survived?

Plant grafting is mentioned in 1 Nephi 15:16 and Jacob 5, yet there is no evidence that the Indians practiced this in 600 BC - 421 AD. Pruning is mentioned in 2 Nephi 15:6 and faces a similar problem. To describe seed and plant growth as "swelling" (Alma 32:28-34 and 33:23) is naive and grossly inaccurate. It reflects the error of preformationism (a discredited scientific hypothesis which held that the entire totality of the mature organism is contained in miniature in the seed).

Is such as this sufficient as far as science goes?

Hmmm...

http://www.helpingmormons.org/biologist_book_of_mormon.htm

Jonny vs. Barnabus - One-on-one Debate

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

barnabus

Member

barnabus

Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

barnabus

Member

barnabus

Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member

jonny

Well-Known Member