Where is the evidence that mormonism is true?

[DrDavidT]

Originally Posted by Erundur

No one can study the stone tablets either, but you come up with all kinds of excuses why we don't need to. Double standard.

find the ark you will find the stone tablets.

no double standard. you have no textual record prior to Smith so you have nothing

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

find the ark you will find the stone tablets.

Then produce the ark.

[DrDavidT]

Originally Posted by Erundur

Then produce the ark.

ha ha ha we do not need to, as I said, we have a rich textual history informing us of God's words. We do not need the ark anymore because of Christ's work.

Your failure to provide one shred of evidence makes your Mormon faith false and cultic. Your dancing around the issues and making unrealistic demands only shows the depth of your deception.

Outside of Smith's claims that there were golden plates, there is no historical reference to them or this so called true faith so until you have them all you have is th eword of a known liar.

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

ha ha ha we do not need to, as I said, we have a rich textual history informing us of God's words. We do not need the ark anymore because of Christ's work.

Just like we don't need the plates anymore because of Christ's work. Does your failure to provide one shred of evidence make your Protestant faith false and cultic? Does your dancing around the issues and making unrealistic demands only show the depth of your deception?

Outside of Smith's claims that there were golden plates, there is no historical reference to them or this so called true faith

Your statement is objectively false. At least eleven others saw the plates, and their testimony must be considered a historical reference by all rational people.

so until you have them all you have is th eword of a known liar.

Worthless anti-Mormon slander.

[DrDavidT]

you blindly trust a con man, a fallible, sinful, human being and refuse to think about your situation and how bad it is.
False.

So you are saying Smith was infallible, holy, perfect and not human? Then why was he in jail for criminal acts? Jesus wasn't.

So do we. We also know the Book of Mormon is true.

HOW? You cannot produce one piece of evidence to support it. Even when asked. So how do you know and what evidence do you have?

That's because I don't have blind faith! Duh!

From everything you have said, you do. You cannot even point to one piece if physical evidence to support your claims. Where are the two civilizations and all the animals as described by Smith in the book of Mormon? If you can't produce real evidence then you have blind faith.

Only partially true. I cannot point to any evidence that you would accept. Big difference.

Then present it don't make my decisions for me. You are not qualified to do that. You also have not produced any biblical support for the initiation rites Mormons hold for entry into the temple.

Just like we don't need the plates anymore because of Christ's work

Then what was Smith restoring and why was he given the plates when Christ had completed his work 1900 years earlier? Obviously he thought Christ didn't do it as the book of Mormon has not support from Christ whatsoever nor do the other Mormon scriptures.

Does your failure to provide one shred of evidence make your Protestant faith false and cultic?

We have evidence, lots of it.

Your statement is objectively false. At least eleven others saw the plates, and their testimony must be considered a historical reference by all rational people.

Hearsay and possible conspiracy. Also biased and prejudiced testimony. We have reports from unbelievers who can read the Bible and have read it on their own. No one outside of your cult has seen or read those plates. Their testimony is worthless.

Worthless anti-Mormon slander.

No it is the truth.

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

So you are saying Smith was infallible, holy, perfect and not human?

So you are putting words into my mouth now?

HOW? You cannot produce one piece of evidence to support it.

You mean we cannot produce one piece of evidence that anti-Mormons would accept.

Then present it don't make my decisions for me.

I don't waste my time doing that anymore. If you really want to know, there is a lot of information at FAIR or FARMS.

You also have not produced any biblical support for the initiation rites Mormons hold for entry into the temple.

We don't have any initiation rites for entry into the temple.

Hearsay and possible conspiracy.

It's a conspiracy!

Also biased and prejudiced testimony.

This is exactly how anti-Mormons summarily dismiss any evidence for the Book of Mormon. Even if you don't believe their testimony, your statement was objectively false.

No it is the truth.

Hardly.

[DrDavidT]

Your tap dancing and avoidance is noted.

So you are putting words into my mouth now?

Nope, just asked a question since you denied he was a human being.

You mean we cannot produce one piece of evidence that anti-Mormons would accept.

Whether it is accepted or not is immaterial. If you have evidence then produce it. I have already shown how worthless the stones are so what evidence do you have?

We don't have any initiation rites for entry into the temple.

I already know that you do.

This is exactly how anti-Mormons summarily dismiss any evidence for the Book of Mormon. Even if you don't believe their testimony, your statement was objectively false.

Evidence is not one group getting together and making claims, evidence stands on its own and points to the truth.

How?

Well, since you've resorted to personal insults, that sounds like a concession to me.

How, if I did which i didn't, does a personal insult become a concession? What dream world are you living in?

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

Nope, just asked a question since you denied he was a human being.

False. I never denied that Joseph Smith was a human being.

Whether it is accepted or not is immaterial. If you have evidence then produce it.

It's already been produced by organizations like FAIR and FARMS.

I already know that you do.

No you don't. If you want to tell me what you think the initiation rite is, I can correct you.

evidence stands on its own and points to the truth.

Not really. Evidence must be interpreted.

How, if I did which i didn't, does a personal insult become a concession?

It is an admission that you can no longer argue for your position with substance. Resorting to insults is an admission that you have lost and simply want to hurt your opponent's feelings.

[DrDavidT]

False. I never denied that Joseph Smith was a human being.

no, human being was one of the descriptions i used and you said false

It's already been produced by organizations like FAIR and FARMS.

Then you should have no problem producing some

Not really. Evidence must be interpreted.

wrong

It is an admission that you can no longer argue for your position with substance.

not at all since i never made a personal attack. and the only one who isn't and can't argue from their position with substance is you.

I know; it's called reformed Egyptian.

not even funny. there is NO script by that name found anywhere nor attested to anywhere

So one script is also a language, therefore all scripts must also be languages? Can you identify the logical fallacy there?

there is NO such thing as reformed Egyptian script. That was another lie spoken by smith.

you would have to produce the golden plates to prove there is such a script.

[BigJulie]

When Erundur stated:
Not really. Evidence must be interpreted.

You said:

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

wrong

Your name "Dr." must not be real---right? I can't imagine any doctor of any degree disagreeing with the fact that evidence must be interpreted. I don't know of a single study in which the "conclusions' are not intrepreted based on the theories and understanding of possible weakness in the methodologies, etc. What type of doctor are you exactly?

[DrDavidT]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

When Erundur stated:
Not really. Evidence must be interpreted.

You said:



Your name "Dr." must not be real---right? I can't imagine any doctor of any degree disagreeing with the fact that evidence must be interpreted. I don't know of a single study in which the "conclusions' are not intrepreted based on the theories and understanding of possible weakness in the methodologies, etc. What type of doctor are you exactly?

Sorry but unless you pony up the evidence you will not have your posts addressed.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

Sorry but unless you pony up the evidence you will not have your posts addressed.

You have made a statement that leads me to believe you do not understand what evidence is.

[DrDavidT]

we now need to ask the following question:

Why are the mormons so afraid of producing any evidence to support their claims and their faith?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

we now need to ask the following question:

Why are the mormons so afraid of producing any evidence to support their claims and their faith?

I thought I had done that with expressing my "proof" in experiencing the fruits of the spirit.

Do you want "archaeological evidence"--well, that would not support our claims of "faith"--but of our scientific studies.

That said, you still have not convinced me that even when it comes to scientific studies that you understand what is considered as evidence, methodologies, weaknesses of every study that is ever done--as no one will ever get an R^2 of 1 and why every study worth its salt leads to another study.

[Christian]

big posted:

I thought I had done that with expressing my "proof" in experiencing the fruits of the spirit.

We've seen no such 'fruits' (in the Bible the fruit of the Spirit is SINGULARLY expressed) from you.

JW's, branch davidians SAY they have the fruit of the Spirit.

We CHRISTIANS HAVE BOTH, the fruit of the Spirit AND archaeological evidence. You don't seem to REALLY have either.

Do you want "archaeological evidence"--well, that would not support our claims of "faith"--but of our scientific studies.

Since you seem to have no REAL EVIDENCE OF EITHER, you are in a mess.

That said, you still have not convinced me that even when it comes to scientific studies that you understand what is considered as evidence, methodologies, weaknesses of every study that is ever done--as no one will ever get an R^2 of 1 and why every study worth its salt leads to another study.

You do not WANT to be convinced of the TRUTH it seems. Why are you so afraid of the blatant LACK of any evidence that there was EVER any reality to joe smith's stories?
God said in HIS WORD, the BIBLE:

Heb 11:1-2
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
NKJV


​How do you reconcile THAT P***AGE with the sad LACK OF SUBSTANCE your religion has to offer?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Christian

big posted:



We CHRISTIANS HAVE BOTH, the fruit of the Spirit AND archaeological evidence. You don't seem to REALLY have either.[/COLOR]

?[/COLOR]

Actually, you don't. You do not have any proof that any of the Bible stories are true. Show me proof of Noah's Arc or the parting of the Red Sea. Show me proof--anywhere from any other source other than the Bible that Jesus existed. What I will show you is that for any "proof" you provide, detractors will tell you that your "evidence" is biased. Just knowing a place existed is not evidence as to what happened in that place.

[teenapenny]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Actually, you don't. You do not have any proof that any of the Bible stories are true. Show me proof of Noah's Arc or the parting of the Red Sea. Show me proof--anywhere from any other source other than the Bible that Jesus existed. What I will show you is that for any "proof" you provide, detractors will tell you that your "evidence" is biased. Just knowing a place existed is not evidence as to what happened in that place.

We have all the proof we need that the Bible stories are true and pray that will be revealed to you also.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by teenapenny

We have all the proof we need that the Bible stories are true and pray that will be revealed to you also.

I know the Bible stories are true--my point is that there is no archaeological evidence that they are. But if you have it, by all means, produce it.

[DrDavidT]

But if you have it, by all means, produce it.

You are confused, this thread is about Mormons producing their evidence, not the believer. Pony up, oh and you have not produced any 'fruits of the spirit' evidence. You do not have any of the fruits of the spirit.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

You are confused, this thread is about Mormons producing their evidence, not the believer.

The believer of what? In a theology that preaches one inherits eternal life without any acts of obedience to Jesus Christ?

James 2:24---New American Standard Bible (NASB)
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

[Christian]

​

Originally Posted by dberrie2000

The believer of what? In a theology that preaches one inherits eternal life without any acts of obedience to Jesus Christ?

James 2:24---New American Standard Bible (NASB)
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Yes, the BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. According to YOUR THEORY, a quadraplegic blind mute would go to hell.

According to the BIBLICAL THEOLOGY, a thief who was fastened to a cross would go to heaven because of his FAITH, NOT because of his works.

As I have SHOWN YOU, the p***age is from a man TO A MAN, and is NOT from God's Viewpoint. GOD'S VIEWPOINT IS:


Rom 4:5-85 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin."
NKJV

You KNOW I have shown this to you before and you have NOT SHOWN that God does NOT justify the ungodly because his faith was not enough works.

EXACTLY WHAT 'works' do YOU deem REQUIRED for man to be forgiven by God? PLEASE BE SPECIFIC. . .if you are up to it.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by Christian

EXACTLY WHAT 'works' do YOU deem REQUIRED for man to be forgiven by God? PLEASE BE SPECIFIC. . .if you are up to it.

Let's start here:

Acts 2:38---King James Version (KJV)
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

[DrDavidT]

Originally Posted by teenapenny

We have all the proof we need that the Bible stories are true and pray that will be revealed to you also.

we have enough evidence from some of the stories to validate the others

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by DrDavidT

we have enough evidence from some of the stories to validate the others

All evidence from believers that validate your beliefs. Okay, we have plenty of that if that is your litmus test for what is "evidence."

http://www.templestudy.com/2011/04/0...-metal-plates/

http://www.ancientamerica.org/librar...LA%205.htm?n=0

[DrDavidT]

The first link only shows that it is a possibility for gold plates to exist. They do nothing to prove Smith's claims as true.

The second link does so much eisegesis that it is worthless. an example:

A now-famous sculpture from ancient America is the large stone monument known as Stela 5, Izapa, which was found in about 1939 at the ruined city called Izapa in southern Mexico. On the face of this monu*ment is carved a complex religious scene, the central feature of which is a great tree with fruit on its branches --undoubtedly a representation of the symbolic tree of life of ancient American religion--and two large semi*-human figures standing (apparently in the air) facing it on either side, attending it.

Also prominent in the scene are six persons seated together on the ground--actually three on each side of the tree, and two of them on a cushion or stool--evi*dently engaged in some discussion. The principal one among them is an old, stoop-shouldered man with a long full beard (hence a white man?), seated oriental-*fashion on a cushion facing the tree, and wearing a high pointed tiara, which resembles the tiara worn by ancient Israelite high priests. His hands are out*stretched in a speaking gesture towards the tree; that is, he seems to be saying something about the tree-*the tree of life--to the other five persons seated around.

First, who said it represented the tree of life? There is no ancient verification to show that idea to be true.

Second, only 2 humans ever saw those trees so why would that picture represent the tree of life?

Third, I can't see the picture very well but the Israelites and Egyptians did not have a monopoly on their style of headdresses. We know this by existence of all the masks in the world and how unrelated and very distant groups of people had the same idea of masks and used them for similar purposes.

Fourth, what verifiable and legitimate information ties that carving to the tree of life? The old man may be telling people a different story.

Neither website provide evidence for Smith's or Mormon claims.

Okay, we have plenty of that if that is your litmus test for what is "evidence."

I provided an example of what real evidence is and so far you have failed to provide any. You did prove a possibility but that is it. There is nothing to say that the golden plates exist or that they spoke on some ancient true religious belief.