An Irritating Argument

[ttribe]

Once again, I was speaking about apologetics in general, not Dan specifically. He words his responses like I am talking about his personal publications, but I am not, or at least I am trying not to. You are all cheering your favorite gladiator and trying to provoke me to put up a fight.

Please...I am "cheering" no one. But you have a demonstrated pattern of making inflammatory comments and then placing the blame back on the us for "misreading" your statements. Perhaps the writer needs to be more specific.

[Zemah]

The only thing that remains constant in regards to true prophets of God who guide Israel is that they are questioned: â??And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness:â? (Exodus 16:2)

Joseph Smith stands with Moses as the prophet chosen of God to gather up Israel in Christ.

Zemah

[Mortal Man]

Not to split hairs, but are they depicted as "pulling" Lamoni's chariots?

Well let's take a look...

9 And they said unto him: Behold, he is feeding thy horses. Now the king had commanded his servants, previous to the time of the watering of their flocks, that they should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth to the land of Nephi; for there had been a great feast appointed at the land of Nephi, by the father of Lamoni, who was king over all the land.

10 Now when king Lamoni heard that Ammon was preparing his horses and his chariots he was more astonished, because of the faithfulness of Ammon, saying: Surely there has not been any servant among all my servants that has been so faithful as this man; for even he doth remember all my commandments to execute them.

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

12 And it came to pass that when Ammon had made ready the horses and the chariots for the king and his servants, he went in unto the king, and he saw that the countenance of the king was changed; therefore he was about to return out of his presence.

Like Nephi, my soul delighteth in plainness. What is the plain reading of the text? The horses had to be fed and prepared (harnessed) and were to "conduct him forth"; i.e., pull the chariots. What do you think he was planning on doing with the horses? Letting them ride in the chariot with him?

Whatever happened to truths being "plain and precious"?

[LifeOnaPlate]

Once again, I was speaking about apologetics in general, not Dan specifically. He words his responses like I am talking about his personal publications, but I am not, or at least I am trying not to. You are all cheering your favorite gladiator and trying to provoke me to put up a fight.

"You all?"

[Mortal Man]

Please...I am "cheering" no one. But you have a demonstrated pattern of making inflammatory comments and then placing the blame back on the us for "misreading" your statements. Perhaps the writer needs to be more specific.

Isaiah 29:

20 For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:

21 That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.

[selek]

Isaiah 29:

20 For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:

21 That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.

Now if only you'd abided by that good advice, you wouldn't have opened this thread in the first place.

[Mortal Man]

"You all?"

Not you LOAP. You are a shining beacon on a hill.

Come, join me, and together we will smite the unjust.

Woe unto selek, Mola, ERayR, ttribe and all their minions, for their "wisdom" shall perish, and the "understanding" of their "prudent men" shall be hid.

[Jason]

Mortal Man is correct that the "horses are tapirs" argument is pretty silly when it comes to pulling chariots, but then I never had a problem believing in pre-Colombian horses being in the Americas anyway.

[Mortal Man]

Now if only you'd abided by that good advice, you wouldn't have opened this thread in the first place.

Isaiah 5

20

[Mortal Man]

Mortal Man is correct that the "horses are tapirs" argument is pretty silly when it comes to pulling chariots, but then I never had a problem believing in pre-Colombian horses being in the Americas anyway.

Proverbs 1:

5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

6 To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.

[Stargazer]

The arguments are sucky, which is why no one uses them. What is irritating is the allegation that we do use these arguments. I am sure that each of those arguments were made by someone somewhere at some point in time. But claiming that these are the basis of apologetics is, flatly, a straw man argument. It is this straw man that needs to be burned.

I didn't get that MM was claiming these args were the basis of apologetics. Quite the contrary.

MM is not incorrect in stating that those arguments are used, I believe. It does seem that many here are offended that someone might think that they themselves might have used some of these arguments, when they are certain they have not. I'll grant this. I don't grant that MM is trying to take cheap shots at any of you who have taken umbrage with the OP. I think of this as "if the shoe fits" argumentation.

I also know darned good and well that there are those newby apologetisists (sp?) who may be using these bad arguments. I don't know if this site gets indexed in search engines or not, but if any of this that MM has brought up does get picked up, at least someone who follows them will discover that these are crappy arguments.

In fact, I rather liked the chance to review these points (some of which were new to me) and address them, even if in my own mind.

[Kenngo1969]

Richard shares my view that Joseph was human, and that he wasn't omniscient.

Oh, crap! How can I possibly worship him if heâ??s merely a non-omniscient human!