Clarify your 'research'

Posted by Trixie on July 08, 1998 at 06:04:55:

In Reply to: Update Joseph Smith - Boy Genius I expected a Challenge posted by SWN on July 08, 1998 at 02:43:37:

First, I want to clarify for you what I perceive the intent of this BB to be. This is clearly labeled for EXmormons. I have noticed, of late, a remarkable increase in the number of postings by Mormon apologists on the main exmo BB, and believe that the word has been "put out" on ARM (where you obviously are obtaining the bulk of your argument, through Kerry Shirts, who, as nice and as intelligent as he may be, has the typical Mormon apologist habit of talking in circles, but with technical enough terminology as to intimidate folks unschooled in language, thus leaving them with the impression that "kerry MUST be right, he sure SOUNDS like he knows what he's talking about", and rather than trying to dissect his lengthy, and somewhat tiresome, responses, justs "trusts" that Kerry Knows Best. This is so typical in Mormon circles that I beieve it is partly the intent of apologists.) Now, I think it is somewhat rude of Mormons to insist on intruding in this area which is so clearly marked as NOT to be a forum for debating the "truth" of Mormonism. Neither I, nor any other exmo that I know of, makes a habit of visiting BBs clearly marked for believing Mormons and posting our arguments. I really detest the thought of seeing these BBs deteriorate into the type of forum that ARM is. I regularly visited ARM for a period of about six months, and have never been to a more rude and contentious BB.

Unless rpcman vetoes this discussion, or others here veto it as well, (which they certainly have a right to do, based upon the intent of the BB as I explained above), I am going to ask you to clarify something. In your introduction, you asserted that you never took any research at face value, and came to the conclusion that the sources cited in anti mormon books were misleading or outright false. Please clarify for me WHICH books you read, and HOW you conducted said research. Most "anti" mormon books which I have read are simply reciting the events surrounded the origination of the LDS church. The documents cited are historical documents which it would be quite difficult to obtain direct contact with. So, other than your one example, in which you chose to quote a GA denying a doctrine which is now believed to be heretical anyway (at least, according to the folks on ARM, in my personal experience, most mormons I knew believed that God did have sex with Mary) just which sources were you able to debunk?

Now, the remainder of this post seems to take the stance that since there are similiarities between Jewish theology and the Book of Abraham, this is supposed to constitute "proof" of the truthfulness of the Book of Abraham. In my own readings, I have come to the conclusion that Joseph Smith was a master at picking up odds and ends from various trains of religious thought of his day, and patch it all up together in his theology. This doesn't prove anything, other than the fact that Joseph Smith was interested in theology, and somewhat creative in designing his own. I also notice that you completely ignored the MAJOR problem of the Book of Abraham (unless you addressed it in one of your other lengthy "kerry shirts" posts). That is, that the papyrus have since been translated by scholars, and they all agree that it contains a typical funerary document which bears NO resemblance to the Book of Abraham. At any point, you are still left with the same problem that fundamentalist Christians face. The story of a creation six thousand years ago, featuring one man and one woman, and then evolving into the flood and other myths of the Old Testament simply doesn't jive with solid science.

I find it also interesting that Kerry admits that we have "lost track" of the Nephites on this continent, and then asserts that because there has been some Egyptian lettering discovered, that THIS is archeological "evidence" of the Book of Mormon. That is quite a stretch. According to the Book of Mormon, this was a HUGE civilization that lasted many hundreds of years. How in the WORLD does one "lose track" of evidence of a civilization of that nature? No coins bearing the names of the kings mentioned? No evidence of a steel making civilization during that time period? Come on! Why not dig up Hill Cumorah, there's bound to be remnants of weapons THERE. Compare this to the evidence supporting the Bible. Of course, there is NO evidence supporting the theology of the Bible, the myths of the Bible, but there is PLENTY of archeological evidence which supports the BACKGROUND of the Bible.. the cities, the kings, the money system, etc. Seems to me if God were so hot on Mormonism, He would have made sure that at least SOME of that type of evidence wouldn't get "lost" over here.

Finally, I want to ask you about your apparent trust in kerry shirts. Have you conducted the primary research with Kerry's writings that you insinuate you have done with "anti" mormon writings? If so, please explain how you have done so.