Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Nemesis

      Contact Us Broken   09/27/2016

      Users, It has come to our attention that the contact us feature on the site is broken.  Please do not use this feature to contact board admins.  Please go through normal channels.  If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied. Also if you try to email us that email address is pretty much ignored.  Also don't contact us to complain, ask for favors, donations, or any other thing that you may think would annoy us.  Nemesis

Steve J

New Member
  • Content count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Steve J

  • Rank
    Newbie: Without form, and void
  1. My comment about you knocking Mormonism wasn't about the study which is Neutral towards Mormonism, but it was this comment f any of those are your priority, then religion will offer you those. You might need to find it with a hefty subscription fee and a willingness to overlook a few outdated prejudices... but given the reward is neural, the brain will be able to ignore the cost (just like it does when ignoring the financial and/or physical cost of drugs or gambling). If that's what rewards your brain, the Mormonism is (probably) far healthier than gambling or drugs!
  2. Haha... Way to take a cheap shot at Mormonism... You never fail to. Like Mormonism is the same for everyone and will react to the brain in a general way.... Smh
  3. Just from a philosophical point of view- what would be the purpose of moroni's promise?
  4. That is fine. I appreciate your contributions, but while it's perfectly fine that you might disagree with Brant's methodology or conclusions, based on my interactions with him I think he and his work deserve a little more respect
  5. Ammon as an Intertextual Type of Christ

    Benjamin Seeker- thanks for your article/comment??? I'm not totally convinced of everything you wrote, but it is definetely well thought out and presented. Thanks again for your contribution.
  6. Benjamin Seeker- Thank you for your response. I seen most of those you listed and also some more(that you probably know about). Some are And I agree with you in that I believe that the book is not historical in the sense that I would use it in a secular setting. I guess I am a mix of a little bit of Gardner, Adam Miller, McGuire, Joe Spencer, Bokovoy, Blake Ostler, etc... I believe the book purposefully is modern in many aspects (how much??? Not sure) and based on faith (and some other interesting factors) that it is ancient. I think also that we studying the BOM always want to say that the translation was done one way throughout the book. tight control, loose control, etc... The Book might just be a hodgepodge. Now I realize that to secular students this is an untestable hypothesis and is a cop-out... But if it is really a book of God, that possibility can't be totally dismissed
  7. Bemjamin Seeker- I find your comments on Mormon -Corinthians helpful... I think you have a habit of going too far other times. I also don't think, like Brant states, that necessarily what you wrote about Corinthians - Mormon has to come down to the BOM being Non-historical. I think it's no- different than if it was a direct word for word copy. It can be interpreted as direct evidence that the BOM is modern. I wish I could be more clear, but I'm writing on a phone.
×