Another Proof Of The Book Of Mormon

Tr2 · February 23, 2004

You should learn before you think. If Joseph had done as you suggested there would have been no "Tree of Life" in the Book of Mormon. You are very wrong on two points.
First: Plants growing in the 1500 have nothing to do with time of the Book of Mormon
Second: There are no historical references to a "Tree of Life" in any publication in our western culture prior to around 1940. Outside of LDS references and the Garden of Eden I doubt you can find a reference of historical fact of a tree that produces "white" fruit.
Though you may not realize it, your objection also proves that the Book of Mormon is based on true historical fact rather that someone like yourslef that thinks only to manufacture non-truth. If you were a little smarter you might consider a study of the time and palce you wish to lie about. But if there was no information (and the Tree of Life was not available to Joseph) a smart lier would at least pick a topic they know something about.
What the Tree of Life means is that the Book of Mormon is more based on historical fact than critics like yourself who do not seem to care at all about historical facts.

Oh well if a tree is documented in the BoM and is little found in other history books then that must prove it true.

Native Americans documented sightings of sasquatches before the landing of the europeans, long before there were Patterson films or Harry and the Henderson movies. They called them the men of the woods who couldn't be killed. Native Americans have been around a lot longer than mormons, so I guess by your logic they have to be the real truth.

February 23, 2004

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 22 2004, 11:16 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 22 2004, 11:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Peace@Feb 21 2004, 12:41 PM

When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life".
It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic.
He got em wrong according to men...not God. And Moroni mentioned there were errors of men....but then he knew there were going to be 'perfect' stone throwers out there.

Peace--there you go again--CIRCULAR LOGIC---ie. The BoM is true; how do I know? Because Moroni and the BoM God told me so? Therefore the BoM is true. You are assuming the truth of the thing you are trying to prove in order to make the proof! Peace--learn to think before you TESTIFY!

Cal -- The logic of Moroni 10 isn't circular. Circular logic is "It is true because it's true." The Book of Mormon promises readers that if they do a certain thing, another, external thing will happen. The witness of the Spirit, when it comes, is a piece of evidence that's external to the Book of Mormon itself.

It's like that scene in Groundhog Day, where Bill Murray's character is trying to get Andie McDowell to believe that he's living the same day over and over again. Circular logic would be for him to say, "This is happening because it's happening." Instead, he makes predictions about external things (people dropping plates, the producer showing up and what he'll say) that are consistent with him having experienced the same scene before.

Now, I suppose that if I wrote a book, and promised in the book that if a person who wanted to know whether it was true should call a certain telephone number and say "Moo goo gai pan" three times, a deep voice would answer "THE DUCK BOOK IS TRUE," then that wouldn't be convincing evidence. I might have made the recording on that phone number myself. But if a person who asks if the Book of Mormon is true receives certain sensations, it's hard to argue that Joseph Smith genetically engineered people's minds in advance to sense those sensations. Again, the witness of the Spirit, if and when it comes, is external evidence. Maybe not perfectly convincing (Trident would probably reject it), but at least it would be consistent with the book's claim to truth, and not circular logic.

Traveler -- The Arab "tree of life" is interesting, but not convincing. First, the concept of a tree of life would have been familiar to Joseph Smith, since it is discussed in the Garden of Eden portion of Genesis. I imagine the Koran may refer to it as well. As for its color -- if I were writing a piece of religious literature, and I wanted to have a fruit stand as a symbol for the grace of God, what color would I make the fruit? Black? Purple? What color is traditionally associated with goodness and purity?

Pahoran · February 23, 2004

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Feb 22 2004, 07:49 PM

When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life".
It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic.
He got em wrong according to men...not God. And Moroni mentioned there were errors of men....but then he knew there were going to be 'perfect' stone throwers out there.
Peace--there you go again--CIRCULAR LOGIC---ie. The BoM is true; how do I know? Because Moroni and the BoM God told me so? Therefore the BoM is true. You are assuming the truth of the thing you are trying to prove in order to make the proof! Peace--learn to think before you TESTIFY!
Cal -- The logic of Moroni 10 isn't circular. Circular logic is "It is true because it's true." The Book of Mormon promises readers that if they do a certain thing, another, external thing will happen. The witness of the Spirit, when it comes, is a piece of evidence that's external to the Book of Mormon itself.
It's like that scene in Groundhog Day, where Bill Murray's character is trying to get Andie McDowell to believe that he's living the same day over and over again. Circular logic would be for him to say, "This is happening because it's happening." Instead, he makes predictions about external things (people dropping plates, the producer showing up and what he'll say) that are consistent with him having experienced the same scene before.
Now, I suppose that if I wrote a book, and promised in the book that if a person who wanted to know whether it was true should call a certain telephone number and say "Moo goo gai pan" three times, a deep voice would answer "THE DUCK BOOK IS TRUE," then that wouldn't be convincing evidence. I might have made the recording on that phone number myself. But if a person who asks if the Book of Mormon is true receives certain sensations, it's hard to argue that Joseph Smith genetically engineered people's minds in advance to sense those sensations. Again, the witness of the Spirit, if and when it comes, is external evidence. Maybe not perfectly convincing (Trident would probably reject it), but at least it would be consistent with the book's claim to truth, and not circular logic.
Traveler -- The Arab "tree of life" is interesting, but not convincing. First, the concept of a tree of life would have been familiar to Joseph Smith, since it is discussed in the Garden of Eden portion of Genesis. I imagine the Koran may refer to it as well. As for its color -- if I were writing a piece of religious literature, and I wanted to have a fruit stand as a symbol for the grace of God, what color would I make the fruit? Black? Purple? What color is traditionally associated with goodness and purity?
Thanks Proud Duck...that was awesome!

Paul Osborne · February 23, 2004

Cal,

I'd like to bear my testimony that I know the...

Paul O

Cal · February 23, 2004

Originally posted by Snow@Feb 22 2004, 03:27 PM
Hey Cal.
Personally I like Peace. But given what you think of Peace's lines of reasoning, what does it say about you that you spend all this time arguing with her?

Given what I sometimes think about your reasoning, why would I spend anytime arguing with you? Actually, I think we all have to much fun with the whole thing to just give it up. Actually, I like Peace. At least she has opinions, as do you, that she is willing to defend. I can respect that even if I disagree with them.

Cal · February 23, 2004

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Feb 22 2004, 06:49 PM

When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life".
It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic.
He got em wrong according to men...not God. And Moroni mentioned there were errors of men....but then he knew there were going to be 'perfect' stone throwers out there.
Peace--there you go again--CIRCULAR LOGIC---ie. The BoM is true; how do I know? Because Moroni and the BoM God told me so? Therefore the BoM is true. You are assuming the truth of the thing you are trying to prove in order to make the proof! Peace--learn to think before you TESTIFY!
Cal -- The logic of Moroni 10 isn't circular. Circular logic is "It is true because it's true." The Book of Mormon promises readers that if they do a certain thing, another, external thing will happen. The witness of the Spirit, when it comes, is a piece of evidence that's external to the Book of Mormon itself.
It's like that scene in Groundhog Day, where Bill Murray's character is trying to get Andie McDowell to believe that he's living the same day over and over again. Circular logic would be for him to say, "This is happening because it's happening." Instead, he makes predictions about external things (people dropping plates, the producer showing up and what he'll say) that are consistent with him having experienced the same scene before.
Now, I suppose that if I wrote a book, and promised in the book that if a person who wanted to know whether it was true should call a certain telephone number and say "Moo goo gai pan" three times, a deep voice would answer "THE DUCK BOOK IS TRUE," then that wouldn't be convincing evidence. I might have made the recording on that phone number myself. But if a person who asks if the Book of Mormon is true receives certain sensations, it's hard to argue that Joseph Smith genetically engineered people's minds in advance to sense those sensations. Again, the witness of the Spirit, if and when it comes, is external evidence. Maybe not perfectly convincing (Trident would probably reject it), but at least it would be consistent with the book's claim to truth, and not circular logic.
Traveler -- The Arab "tree of life" is interesting, but not convincing. First, the concept of a tree of life would have been familiar to Joseph Smith, since it is discussed in the Garden of Eden portion of Genesis. I imagine the Koran may refer to it as well. As for its color -- if I were writing a piece of religious literature, and I wanted to have a fruit stand as a symbol for the grace of God, what color would I make the fruit? Black? Purple? What color is traditionally associated with goodness and purity?

PD--how can the BoM promise ANYTHING if the person making the promise is not PRESUMMED to have lived in the first place? That's indeed circular! In other words, one has to presume that a promise HAS been made. If it has, then why the need for anything external? You have already presumed to be true the thing for which you are seeking confirmation! That is, that a promise was ACTUALLY made. If you presume a promise was made, then the BoM is already true!

February 23, 2004

Has anyone ever heard of 'prophecy perfect'? LOL Well it does exist....

February 23, 2004

Cal --

PD--how can the BoM promise ANYTHING if the person making the promise is not PRESUMMED to have lived in the first place? That's indeed circular! In other words, one has to presume that a promise HAS been made. If it has, then why the need for anything external? You have already presumed to be true the thing for which you are seeking confirmation! That is, that a promise was ACTUALLY made. If you presume a promise was made, then the BoM is already true!

You don't have to presume Moroni ever existed to presume that the promise in Moroni 10 was made. Whether Moroni made it or not, the promise exists: it's right there, in the Book of Mormon's text. Somebody made it, be it Moroni or Joseph Smith. Whether Moroni or Joseph Smith made it is irrelevant. What gives the Book of Mormon its epistemological power, and what keeps the argument from being circular is that the passage in question promises an external confirmation, which the author of the Book of Mormon, whoever he was, could not have arranged himself.

A person trying to get that external confirmation doesn't have to presume the Book of Mormon is true, or even that Moroni, the person supposedly making the promise, ever existed. He seeks the external confirmation precisely to determine the truth of the thing you're saying he's already "presumed" -- that Moroni actually wrote the passage in question.

Snow · February 23, 2004

Haven't we had this circular argument before - with someone anyway.

PD is correct, since delivery on the promise is external to the vehicle of the promise, it is not circular. A circular instance would be if we assumed the book is true because it says it is true. However, since it is something outside the book (the Holy Ghost) that says it (presumabley) it is not circular.

February 23, 2004

'prophecy perfect' is a form of prophectic scripture written in past tense.

Tense has everything to do with state of being/viewing as God all things present. It doesn't matter whether or not Moroni is before or after or not at all in the writings. It is all about the state of being you are in...if you exist and can apply what you read to your profit.

Cal · February 24, 2004

Again, please read the passage carefully. Mor. 10:4. You already have to believe in Christ in order for the promise to work. The BoM proclaims itself to be a TESTAMENT of Christ, but you already have to believe in order to find out if it is true. IOW you have to believe in the BoM in order to find out if it is believable! Maybe that doesn't sound circular to you, but it does to me. Perhaps we have gone around in circles about this long enough

Another thing about Mor. 10:4--if you notice in the beginning of the Chapter, the Chapter is addressed to the Lamanites. It says nothing about anyone else. The PROMISE is to the Lamanites. Now, if we could just find some, maybe we could test the promise!

Snow · February 24, 2004

Cal,

Two things:

1. Believing in Christ and having the Holy Ghost bless you with a testimony of the BoM are two seperate things. Just believing in Christ does not mean you will believe the BoM. That's non-circular.

2. So you have to believe. That's the nature of faith. I believe, on faith, pending further light. As I wait for further certainity, I accept that the answer to my prayers could be positive or negative.

February 24, 2004

Originally posted by Cal@Feb 23 2004, 09:04 PM
Again, please read the passage carefully. Mor. 10:4. You already have to believe in Christ in order for the promise to work. The BoM proclaims itself to be a TESTAMENT of Christ, but you already have to believe in order to find out if it is true. IOW you have to believe in the BoM in order to find out if it is believable! Maybe that doesn't sound circular to you, but it does to me. Perhaps we have gone around in circles about this long enough
Another thing about Mor. 10:4--if you notice in the beginning of the Chapter, the Chapter is addressed to the Lamanites. It says nothing about anyone else. The PROMISE is to the Lamanites. Now, if we could just find some, maybe we could test the promise!

If you have read the whole of the BofM first, then when you come to Moroni's challenge and promise...you do know Christ because the entire book teaches about Him. If you don't believe in Christ by that time, then you don't have to accept the promise and challenge from Moroni either. I don't see the problem.

And as for who can accept the promise from Moroni.....Well most of the OT was written to the Jews...but I find it very helpful to myself and family. I guess you can exclude yourself from the promises on about everything in the scriptures if you base it on this premis.

Cal · February 25, 2004

Originally posted by Snow@Feb 23 2004, 10:25 PM
Cal,
Two things:
1. Believing in Christ and having the Holy Ghost bless you with a testimony of the BoM are two seperate things. Just believing in Christ does not mean you will believe the BoM. That's non-circular.
2. So you have to believe. That's the nature of faith. I believe, on faith, pending further light. As I wait for further certainity, I accept that the answer to my prayers could be positive or negative.

1) Why do you need the BoM if you already believe in Christ? I thought the purpose of the BoM was to "convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ...."
2) If you already believe, then why do you need Moroni 10:4 ?

Cal · February 25, 2004

Originally posted by Peace+Feb 24 2004, 09:02 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Peace @ Feb 24 2004, 09:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Feb 23 2004, 09:04 PM
Again, please read the passage carefully. Mor. 10:4. You already have to believe in Christ in order for the promise to work. The BoM proclaims itself to be a TESTAMENT of Christ, but you already have to believe in order to find out if it is true. IOW you have to believe in the BoM in order to find out if it is believable! Maybe that doesn't sound circular to you, but it does to me. Perhaps we have gone around in circles about this long enough
Another thing about Mor. 10:4--if you notice in the beginning of the Chapter, the Chapter is addressed to the Lamanites. It says nothing about anyone else. The PROMISE is to the Lamanites. Now, if we could just find some, maybe we could test the promise!

If you have read the whole of the BofM first, then when you come to Moroni's challenge and promise...you do know Christ because the entire book teaches about Him. If you don't believe in Christ by that time, then you don't have to accept the promise and challenge from Moroni either. I don't see the problem.

And as for who can accept the promise from Moroni.....Well most of the OT was written to the Jews...but I find it very helpful to myself and family. I guess you can exclude yourself from the promises on about everything in the scriptures if you base it on this premis.

Let's see, do I have it right? By the time I read the BoM, I will already know it's true, so I don't need Moroni 10:4? Then why did Moroni bother to make the Promise?

Snow · February 25, 2004

Originally posted by Cal@Feb 24 2004, 07:15 PM

1) Why do you need the BoM if you already believe in Christ? I thought the purpose of the BoM was to "convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ...."
2) If you already believe, then why do you need Moroni 10:4 ?

Cal,

You're a bright guy - I think we can both agree. Being the bright guy that we both agree that you are, you cause me to wonder... Wassup with some of your rebuttals? Take your points above. Can you not intuit the correct response to either or both? Maybe you already know the answers but hope that I do not and so I will cede the debate to you. Or maybe you are just arguing for argument's sake; that's probably it, your just responding back to get the last word in. Okay. But you should already know how the correct response should go.

February 25, 2004

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 24 2004, 07:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 24 2004, 07:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Feb 23 2004, 10:25 PM
Cal,
Two things:
1. Believing in Christ and having the Holy Ghost bless you with a testimony of the BoM are two seperate things. Just believing in Christ does not mean you will believe the BoM. That's non-circular.
2. So you have to believe. That's the nature of faith. I believe, on faith, pending further light. As I wait for further certainity, I accept that the answer to my prayers could be positive or negative.

1) Why do you need the BoM if you already believe in Christ? I thought the purpose of the BoM was to "convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ...."
2) If you already believe, then why do you need Moroni 10:4 ?

Because we need all the encouragement and insightfulness we can get....just like going to Church every Sunday...

Why do we need TV or any other negative influences on a consistent basis?

Why do you need to repeat the same unenlightening arguments over and over?

We need a lot more spiritual uplifting things because your kind come and try and beat us down on our own turf.

Wow...that takes a lot of intelligence....to figure out that we need all the prophets writings we can get our hands on to counter all the junk and junk dealers thrown and throwing junk at us where ever we go...

Rodney · February 26, 2004

The way I find it circular is that in order to trust or believe the promise made by Moroni, it would necessitate a trust or belief that Moroni existed in the first place. Sort of like trusting the department store Santa Claus when he promises you that toy your dad overheard you asking for and then believing that when the toy came it was actually delivered by that Santa.

February 27, 2004

I disagree....you prove Moroni existed by testing his promise...if you receive an answer...you know....

Also...your circular is nothing more than the chicken and the egg question. That has never been a hard question for those who believe in the Bible.

porterrockwell · February 27, 2004

What's sad is that you ask for worldly proof that BOM is true. And while that proof will come forth in latter times, why be a "doubting Thomas." What I find funny is we get all these EV's in our grill about how there is no proof that the BOM is true. Well guess what, by that premise then how can you believe in GOD!? There is NO PHYSICAL PROOF that God exists, that is not how we come to know him. For if we come to know him by the world, so shall the world take him away from us. I have faith in the Holy Ghost, that is how you recieve confirmation that God is our Eternal Father in Heaven, that Jesus is the Christ, the Only-Begotten and our Redeemer, and that the Holy Ghost makes manifest all truths by which our faith is sufficient and our intent true. If you need absolute physical proof you are no different than the scientist who challenges the existance of God, and the conditions by which your faith is established also maintain it on a sandy foundation, of which will not stand the tests that lie ahead. If you cannot rely on that which the Lord has brought forth as sufficient confirmation, then you are not ready for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Rodney · February 27, 2004

Which makes your faith no more nor less valuable or credible than that of a Taliban member.

Rodney · February 27, 2004

Originally posted by Peace@Feb 26 2004, 11:45 PM
I disagree....you prove Moroni existed by testing his promise...if you receive an answer...you know....

I got the toy Santa promised so he passed the test. Santa lives!!

Outshined · February 27, 2004

Originally posted by Rodney@Feb 27 2004, 06:54 AM
Which makes your faith no more nor less valuable or credible than that of a Taliban member.

We can say that about any religious belief.

Rodney · February 27, 2004

Originally posted by Outshined+Feb 27 2004, 08:19 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Outshined @ Feb 27 2004, 08:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Rodney@Feb 27 2004, 06:54 AM
Which makes your faith no more nor less valuable or credible than that of a Taliban member.

We can say that about any religious belief.

PREZACTA-MUNTO!!!

Outshined · February 27, 2004

Can I get an AY-Mayun?

Sign In

Another Proof Of The Book Of Mormon

Recommended Posts

Tr2

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Guest TheProudDuck

Pahoran

Paul Osborne

Cal

Cal

Guest Starsky

Guest TheProudDuck

Snow

Guest Starsky

Cal

Snow

Guest Starsky

Cal

Cal

Snow

Guest Starsky

Rodney

Guest Starsky

porterrockwell

Rodney

Rodney

Outshined

Rodney

Outshined

Join the conversation

Announcements

Browse

Activity