Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-06-2013, 11:14 AM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 11:04 AM)JAH Wrote:  I had to go back to edit my above post. I checked and indeed the 11 witnesses claimed to have seen the gold tablets. 3 in a vision and 8 very much connected to Smith.

I hope this causes no confusion.

The key word is 'claimed'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 11:44 AM
Re: RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 11:04 AM)JAH Wrote:  I had to go back to edit my above post. I checked and indeed the 11 witnesses claimed to have seen the gold tablets. 3 in a vision and 8 very much connected to Smith.

I hope this causes no confusion.

There were no independant witnesses at all and visions don't count in court. Angel

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:01 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 10:46 AM)JAH Wrote:  Evenheathen, I continue to not understand the logic.

OK, simply saying that Joseph Smith was convicted of fraud does not probe absolutely that the book of mormon was a fraud. That is correct on its surface.

It is either correct or it is not correct. If you want to take into account every facet of the situation and come to a logical conclusion about whether or not the book of mormon is a fraud, then I agree with you. I was simply stating that Starcrash's argument is technically a sound argument, not that Smith's was.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:05 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 05:41 AM)Stephen Charchuk Wrote:  When all the evidence points one way and your logiic another than I say that the logic used was dream logic..

Examining evidence to make a sound conclusion about a claim is not the same as using a logical fallacy as a blanket statement about said claim. I suppose now you'll be calling me a mormon....

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:31 PM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2013 01:45 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Doube post.

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:44 PM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2013 01:55 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 01:05 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Examining evidence to make a sound conclusion about a claim is not the same as using a logical fallacy as a blanket statement about said claim. I suppose now you'll be calling me a mormon....

There was no fallacy, logicial or otherwise, when it is proven fact, Mr. Spock. One just has to honestly look at the story and couple it with his history and there can be no real doubt as to his total lack of trustworthiness(sp) in ANYTHING he does or creates(In this case makesup out of thin air). Anyone would have to a fool to have trusted him in the first place and an idiot to continue AFTER he was exposed. I make no apologies for being honest in what I say. I call a rat a rat and I make sure not to get bitten as well.

As for calling you a Mormon then ok you're a Mormon. Whatever turns your crank. [Note: Sarcasm] Rolleyes

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:48 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
evenheathen, My point remains that a statement out of context can be questioned as an ad hominem attack. Within context it does not necessarily mean it is.

I could say that the sports editor of the San Francisco Chronicle is a thoughtless jerk. In the context of that simple statement this is an ad hominem attack (as I understand that term). I could say that I have read many of his columns and the frequency with which he is wrong is amazing (he for example argued against making Colin Kaepernick the permanent starting QB). But I would on this forum have to find many provable examples to convince anyone.

On this forum it should be presumed that most have some knowledge of the history of the mormon church. With that presumption making the statement that it is a fraud because Joseph Smith was a fraud should not need defending or the level of proof demanded elsewhere. In the context of presumed knowledge questioning specific wording is not logical.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JAH's post
13-06-2013, 01:53 PM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2013 01:58 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
No comment.

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 01:58 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(13-06-2013 01:31 PM)Stephen Charchuk Wrote:  
(13-06-2013 01:05 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Examining evidence to make a sound conclusion about a claim is not the same as using a logical fallacy as a blanket statement about said claim. I suppose now you'll be calling me a mormon....

Whatever turns your crank, sparky. You're a mormon, or is there one too many Ms in there?. Rolleyes [Note: Sarcasm]

In this case there was no fallacy, logical or otherwise, when it is the truth, Mr. Spock. There was no real doubt about his guilt and coupled with his history that makes it fact. Defending him, on the otherhand, is a fallacy.

That's the frustrating thing about fallacies, those who make them generally don't realize it. The argument starcrash and now myself are making has nothing to do with Smith. The mistake in your logic has nothing to do with Smith. This has already been pointed out and has been ignored.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2013, 02:28 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
evenheathen, if I may add something.

By logical extension of your and Starcrash's argument if I was to say here "the bible is full of contradictions" I would be required to link to various web sites that present those contradictions or I could be accused of making an incomplete argument.

On a theist forum I would suggest that reference would be required. Even on this forum if the comment was regarding a specific point I would think I should be required to provide reference. On this forum I would however expect the bulk of the readers to understand and agree with the meaning of that statement and it would not demand reference.

Like I said some posts ago I find the argument you and Starcrash are making somewhat pedantic.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JAH's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: