[split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-01-2014, 02:04 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 01:54 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 12:49 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  To be fair I was more flippant to you than you probably deserved and you are correct about the convicted conman statement. Joseph Smith Jr. was convicted of a misdemeanor crime that covers a large swath of undesirables from conmen to vagrants (their terms not mine).

In reality, Smith was never convicted of anything. The evidence that is touted as suggesting that are bills from a judge Neely and constable De Zeng that are ostensibly for a trial, but based on several factors, are known to have actually been for an "examination," or a pretrial hearing which was supposed to have lead to an actual trial by jury. Before that happened, however, Smith was given "leg bail" (i.e., told to scram).

(02-01-2014 12:49 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  If anything stating it how I did actually weakens my case since even if Smith was a well respected member of the community his tale is so far out of the realm of credible so as to not stand up to scrutiny. I have read the book of Mormon and between the huge amounts of things stated that are impossible to have happened knowing what we know of genetics and archeology and the simple fact that it reads like an 18th century man is trying to sound like he is speaking 16th century english, it comes off as an obvious fraud. The fact that to this day the LDS church acts like a well financed cult tends to confirm my suspicions.

What the Book of Mormon actually says and what it is characterized as saying are different things, and it is not univocal, contrary to popular opinion, but I don't disagree significantly with your assessment of it.


I was looking at this recently and I seem to remember him having been convicted of a similar charge earlier but yes in the Judge Neely case it looked like he was charged and told to beat it or he would go to trial. Not an uncommon occurrence in small towns at the time, not worth it for them to pay to lock a drifter up best to just hurry him along his way. My point still stands however, even with an impeccable character (something Smith did not posses) his story just lacks all credibility. Occam's razor would seem to suggest he is very similar to last centuries most successful cult lead L. Ron Hubbard.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:11 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 01:58 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 01:56 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  OMG. Daniel McC came back !! Hey Mr. Mak, (are you Dr. Mak now ??) ... your ears must have been ringing. A month or two back I was being raked over the coals, and I mentioned that you were the ONLY real (theist) scholar that we've ever had here. (You TOTALLY demolished a couple people ... one a JW, as I recall... without batting an eye.) I saw you were at a conference I was trying to get to earlier this last year, (I think), out East with a couple others I respect. Your knowledge of Hebrew is pretty awesome. When you were here before, the discussion was abruptly left off after the notion of "compartmentalizing cognitive dissonances" had just begun. Maybe later that can be continued. It would be interesting to pick your brain, (as you must have to do a lot of that). Was it your "New Year's *resolution* to return here ? Tongue

Fanboi. Dodgy

(02-01-2014 01:55 PM)anonymous66 Wrote:  Tongue
How does an honest request for clarification make me a "poopyhead"?

For losing track during written correspondence. Tongue

Tongue
Maybe I just don't like to make assumptions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:11 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 01:56 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  OMG. Daniel McC came back !! Hey Mr. Mak, (are you Dr. Mak now ??) ... your ears must have been ringing. A month or two back I was being raked over the coals, and I mentioned that you were the ONLY real (theist) scholar that we've ever had here. (You TOTALLY demolished a couple people ... one a JW, as I recall... without batting an eye.) I saw you were at a conference I was trying to get to earlier this last year, (I think), out East with a couple others I respect. Your knowledge of Hebrew is pretty awesome. When you were here before, the discussion was abruptly left off after the notion of "compartmentalizing cognitive dissonances" had just begun. Maybe later that can be continued. It would be interesting to pick your brain, (as you must have to do a lot of that). Was it your "New Year's *resolution* to return here ? Tongue

Hi, Bucky! You were trying to get to SBL? It was a good time. It's in San Diego this coming year. You should definitely try to make it.

I appreciate the kind words. It's not Dr. Mak yet, but it's getting there. I am working as a scripture translation supervisor for the time being, but looking to start up my doctorate later this year. I recently finished another master's degree. If you're interested, you can find my thesis, "The Conceptualization of Deity in the Hebrew Bible in Cognitive Perspective," here.

It was not my new year's resolution to come back here, but I saw a spike in people arriving at my blog through a link posted here, so I thought I'd see what was up. Turns out it was a real old thread, but I thought I'd comment on some things Ralph Ellis said, and I poked around a bit afterward. I was on vacation, so I had the time. Today's my first day back at work, and this is digging more into my time than I like, so I will have to participate on a limited basis if I decide to keep commenting.

Thanks again for saying hi!

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes maklelan's post
02-01-2014, 02:13 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 12:39 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 12:14 PM)anonymous66 Wrote:  Here's more on a mythical Jesus...

I'm well aware of the field, and Verenna and West are colleagues of mine. This Wiki article doesn't really assuage my concerns, though.

Sorry to interrupt again, but are you just saying you have concerns about the whole "Christ Myth" theory in general?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:14 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 02:04 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I was looking at this recently and I seem to remember him having been convicted of a similar charge earlier but yes in the Judge Neely case it looked like he was charged and told to beat it or he would go to trial. Not an uncommon occurrence in small towns at the time, not worth it for them to pay to lock a drifter up best to just hurry him along his way. My point still stands however, even with an impeccable character (something Smith did not posses) his story just lacks all credibility. Occam's razor would seem to suggest he is very similar to last centuries most successful cult lead L. Ron Hubbard.

The only thing I'll say here is that the "cult" rhetoric is a bit outdated and unsophisticated.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:14 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 01:55 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 01:23 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Do you see value in arguing a strawman?!

I don't believe my claim is a strawman, and I've made a case for it. Would you like to respond to that, as well as to his response?
refer to the quotes contained in post #33 of this thread.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:16 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 02:13 PM)anonymous66 Wrote:  Sorry to interrupt again, but are you just saying you have concerns about the whole "Christ Myth" theory in general?

I'm saying that mythicists don't really characterize "more scholarly approach to the history of religions," as you originally suggested. There are far, far more erudite and insightful contributions being made by others. Mythicists are basically fringe scholars of religion.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:21 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 02:14 PM)Stevil Wrote:  refer to the quotes contained in post #33 of this thread.

You'll notice, if you look at that post, that my post was cut off mid-sentence. If you go look at the rest of my post you'll see some claims and some questions, along with a brief explanation of what they mean. If you read further, you'll find Rev answers my questions in the affirmative.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:22 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 02:14 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 02:04 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I was looking at this recently and I seem to remember him having been convicted of a similar charge earlier but yes in the Judge Neely case it looked like he was charged and told to beat it or he would go to trial. Not an uncommon occurrence in small towns at the time, not worth it for them to pay to lock a drifter up best to just hurry him along his way. My point still stands however, even with an impeccable character (something Smith did not posses) his story just lacks all credibility. Occam's razor would seem to suggest he is very similar to last centuries most successful cult lead L. Ron Hubbard.

The only thing I'll say here is that the "cult" rhetoric is a bit outdated and unsophisticated.

I don't think there is much debate that Scientology is a cult. LDS may have moved on but they still act a bit cultish from time to time. My opinion is that the reason we can point out all the flaws in Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard is they lived in a time that saw their actions reliably recorded. If we had the same for Jesus or Muhammad (provided either actually existed) I think we would have a much different discussion.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2014, 02:26 PM
RE: [split] maklelan and others discuss evidence
(02-01-2014 02:16 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(02-01-2014 02:13 PM)anonymous66 Wrote:  Sorry to interrupt again, but are you just saying you have concerns about the whole "Christ Myth" theory in general?

I'm saying that mythicists don't really characterize "more scholarly approach to the history of religions," as you originally suggested. There are far, far more erudite and insightful contributions being made by others. Mythicists are basically fringe scholars of religion.

They are definitely in the minority. But, that in and of itself doesn't make them wrong. and they are respected scholars.

your statement "There are far, far more erudite and insightful contributions being made by others" is merely an assertion.

But, I would like to read more about the history of religions from a variety of sources.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: