Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Just getting around to reading this thread. A lots of good posts here, but in my observation, the above takes the prize for pithy wisdom.Thanks. I mean it, thanks.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 At last resort, always use disparaging remarks about someone who has a different opinion. That's the mature thing to do, right? It doesn't reflect very well on Mormon intellectual honesty, I'm afraid. Why not put on your thinking cap and comment on the Jewish commentary posted directly above?Yes, those were such disparaging remarks. What a riot. Oh I already said that. Oh well.
SilverKnight Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 What figures? That I choose a name from the Movie Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom? Is this some kind of a rebuttle?It's because you are a mormon male: a high priest of an evil pagan cult that dons your satanic vestments and tears the still-beating hearts out of garlanded innocents in gruesome sacrificial rites to blasphemous death-gods.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 It's because you are a mormon male: a high priest of an evil pagan cult that dons your satanic vestments and tears the still-beating hearts out of garlanded innocents in gruesome sacrificial rites to blasphemous death-gods.I guess I better get back to my fantasy games. Lol. This has been truly a great thread.
WalkerW Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 It's because you are a mormon male: a high priest of an evil pagan cult that dons your satanic vestments and tears the still-beating hearts out of garlanded innocents in gruesome sacrificial rites to blasphemous death-gods."Kali-mah! Kali-mah!"
maklelan Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Here is another scholar who gives us insight into the verse, Gen. 4:1:'When the first woman voices, on giving birth to her firstborn, her heart's joy at having become a partner of the Almighty in the work of creation, and, and feels, as a result of this partnership, God's personal nearness to herself, she uses, in accordance with our rules, the name YHWH, and cries exultingly: I have created a man equally with God (Gen. iv 1). On the other hand, at the birth of her third son, when she is in mourning for the calamity that bereaved her of her first two sons in one day, she is indeed conscious of the power of the Creator, who cructifies and multiplies His creatures, but in the despair of her soul, which still grieves for the first two children, and with their memory revivified just at this hour, she is unable to rise to a sense of God's nearness and of sharing in His creativity. This time she does not describe the birth of her son as a new act of creation that she herself had achieved jointly with YHWH, but as a passive acceptance on her part of what the God of life had given her: For Elohim has appointed for me another child instead of Abel, for Cain slew him (iv 25). The position is not unlike that depicted in Amos (vi 10) with reference to those who converse in the house of the departed: Hush! We must not mention the name of YHWH. Only when the first human pair were granted to see grandchildren --- a new assurance of continued life for generations --- only then did they find solace an feel again the proximity of YHWH: Then men began once more to call upon the name of YHWH (Gen. iv 26).' --- Umberto Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch (Hebrew University, Jerusalem). "Equally" is nowhere in the text. Cassuto's just using creative eisegesis. However, I'm still waiting for proof that the Hebrew verb, qnh, refers to conceiving a child in the Bible. Your expert contends that the verb means to procreate, so let's see some word studies in that regard. I've given you two examples where it refers to attained/get/etc.....so far you have given me nothing.Athanasius, twice in this thread I've cited the four most authoritative lexica on the planet for this topic. Here they are again. Respond or leave, but stop pretending this information is still lacking:Issam K. H. Halayqa, A Comparative Lexicon of Ugaritic and Canaanite (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 340; M
Doctor Steuss Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 It may just be the Adversary in me, but I do enjoy when Dr. S gets snarky with our reading comprehension-impaired guests.You, sir, are going to hell.(Save me a place up front?)
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 "Kali-mah! Kali-mah!"I used to have that just under my avatar but it got deleted when the board switched software."Kali Ma Shakti Dae" It used to be my signature. BUt they got rid of those.
SilverKnight Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 AUthanasius, Twice in this thread I've cited the four most...Wait. Stop right there.Aurelia = Carmella = Athanasius?Please tell me if the Queen Malificent of CARM herself didn't just get decapitated on MADB?!Isn't she supposed to be an anti-mormon lecturer of great renown?It can't be her. Catherine Aurelia is way too pleasant for it to be her.
Doctor Steuss Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Ps. 139:13Methinks this verse, in particular, makes a lot more sense when viewing it with this definition in mind (at least, I had a bit of a "a-ha" moment).(Now, I
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Wait. Stop right there.Aurelia = Carmella = Athanasius?Please tell me if the Queen Malificent of CARM herself didn't just get decapitated on MADB?!Isn't she supposed to be an anti-mormon lecturer of great renown?It can't be her. Catherine Aurelia is way too pleasant for it to be her.I had wondered the same thing.
maklelan Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Wait. Stop right there.Aurelia = Carmella = Athanasius?Please tell me if the Queen Malificent of CARM herself didn't just get decapitated on MADB?!Isn't she supposed to be an anti-mormon lecturer of great renown?It can't be her. Catherine Aurelia is way too pleasant for it to be her.I can't imagine it's anyone else. She's been the main one at CARM whining impotently about her brand of "scholarship" vs. mine.
WalkerW Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 "Equally" is nowhere in the text. Cassuto's just using creative eisegesis.Well, that was easy.As for the rest, I think there is one word that describes what just took place:
Scott Lloyd Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 I can't imagine it's anyone else. She's been the main one at CARM whining impotently about her brand of "scholarship" vs. mine.Never having visited the place, I'm trying to keep the cast of characters straight. Is Athanasius (aka Catherine Aurelia) also the one who came here a while back posting as "Carmella"?
Daniel Peterson Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Everyone:It looks like she's limped back to CARM to tell them how brutish and unchristian we are. As demonstrated by this thread, Evangelical criticism of mormonism is laughably easy to demolish. Indeed this thread turned into slow-pitch day at the batting cages (especially after our Hebrew scholars joined the fray).But I would not count this as a victory. The real criticism comes from secularists.And, unlike EV criticism, it is formidable.We have our hands full with it. And we've lost more battles than we've won.The next real trial of LDS theology (and all theologies) is going to come from secular criticism.And it's not going to be easy.There's a reason why all our former LDS friends are now agnostic or humanist.I don't agree that we've lost more battles than we've won with our secular critics, or that the situation is so dire, but I absolutely do agree with the sentiment that secularizing critics typically represent a far more serious challenge to the claims of the restored Gospel, intellectually speaking, than do typical evangelical anti-Mormons.When the FARMS Review began, one of its favorite targets was evangelical criticism of Mormonism. But good grief: After responding to the same shallow, complacent, disingenuous, dreary, monotonous arguments over and over and over again, the exercise really did lose its charm. I can barely bring myself to read the stuff any more. (Paul Owen and Carl Mosser were absolutely right in their famous critique of their fellow evangelicals' attempts to combat Mormonism.) What passes, I guess, for serious discourse over on CARM strikes me, at least in my experience with it, as not only ugly and unchristian in tone but as vacuous and laughable in substance. In an odd sense, I actually regret this. We could profit from better critics -- Fawn Brodie and others have spurred us on to do better history, for example, and have kept us on our toes -- yet, with very few exceptions, we conspicuously lack competent evangelical opponents. But, alas, so long as they think they're unanswerably devastating, they're unlikely to feel much need to improve.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Never having visited the place, I'm trying to keep the cast of characters straight. I Athanasius (aka Catherine Aurelia) also the one who came here a while back posting as "Carmella"?If this is the case I will plead with the mods not to ban her yet. I don't mind her here.
structurecop Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 (Save me a place up front?)I have it on good authority that Hell is a veritable 24/7 snark-fest. I can't wait!
SilverKnight Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 I can't imagine it's anyone else. She's been the main one at CARM whining impotently about her brand of "scholarship" vs. mine.Hot damn! This is too good!Catherine Aurelia-Carmella-Athanasius-Carol:Never forget this day. This was the day when you mustered the courage to face the people you spend your life lying about on your miserable little monkey cage of a message board. The day you stared in the face of the people you are paid by your pathetic little 'mini$try' to spread filth about.This was the day you got your due comeuppance. This was the day Mak et. al. cut out your lying tongue, and unmasked you for duplicitous hate-vomiting wretch you are.Catherine Aurelia, if you are not Carmella-Athanasius-Carol, then I sincerely apologize, that mean-spirited tirade was not meant for you.But if you are, you just got a steaming pile of Karma shoved down your throat.So I'll take my mod-sponsored vacation. It was worth it.
WalkerW Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Hot damn! This it too good!Catherine Aurelia-Carmella-Athanasius-Carol:Never forget this day. This was the day when you mustered the courage to face the people you spend your life lying about on your miserable little monkey cage of a message board. The day you stared in the face of the people you are paid by your pathetic little 'mini$try' to spread filth about.This was the day you got your due comeuppance. This was the day Mak et. al. cut out your lying tongue, and unmasked for duplicitous hate-vomiting wretch you are.Catherine Aurelia, if you are not Carmella-Athanasius-Carol, then I sincerely apologize, that mean-spirited tirade was not meant for you.But if you are, you just got a steaming pile of Karma shoved down your throat.So I'll take my mod-sponsored vacation. It was worth it.How I wish I had saved the picture for this one. Oh, well.X2
Catherine Aurelia Posted November 17, 2009 Author Posted November 17, 2009 I can't imagine it's anyone else. She's been the main one at CARM whining impotently about her brand of "scholarship" vs. mine.No, that is untrue. I don't claim any scholarship in Hebrew, but doubt that yours is uncolored by the cult you are a part of. I, however, do recognize that there are many great Hebrew scholars who disagree with you - although, everyone that we mention, you have rejected as being inferior to your own strange understanding.Tell me, mak, what does the first part of Genesis one state? Do you ever use CONTEXT to determine a word, ever?
Calm Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 I vote for Mudcat and Rhinomelon.Mudcat and Rhino shouldn't be even considered to be in the same category as this poster.This thread is a prime example of where DOP's method would have created a completely different result.
Catherine Aurelia Posted November 17, 2009 Author Posted November 17, 2009 Hot damn! This is too good!Catherine Aurelia-Carmella-Athanasius-Carol:Never forget this day. This was the day when you mustered the courage to face the people you spend your life lying about on your miserable little monkey cage of a message board. The day you stared in the face of the people you are paid by your pathetic little 'mini$try' to spread filth about.This was the day you got your due comeuppance. This was the day Mak et. al. cut out your lying tongue, and unmasked you for duplicitous hate-vomiting wretch you are.Catherine Aurelia, if you are not Carmella-Athanasius-Carol, then I sincerely apologize, that mean-spirited tirade was not meant for you.But if you are, you just got a steaming pile of Karma shoved down your throat.So I'll take my mod-sponsored vacation. It was worth it.Is this the type of language that Mormons are allowed to use here? Aren't there any moderators. I bet if a Christian ever said anyting 1/4 as disgusting as this, they'd be banned for life from here.
Catherine Aurelia Posted November 17, 2009 Author Posted November 17, 2009 If this is the case I will plead with the mods not to ban her yet. I don't mind her here.Ban me? If I'm banned, why not the Mormons here who have indulged in some of the worst invective I've seen on the net?
Catherine Aurelia Posted November 17, 2009 Author Posted November 17, 2009 I don't agree that we've lost more battles than we've won with our secular critics, or that the situation is so dire, but I absolutely do agree with the sentiment that secularizing critics typically represent a far more serious challenge to the claims of the restored Gospel, intellectually speaking, than do typical evangelical anti-Mormons.When the FARMS Review began, one of its favorite targets was evangelical criticism of Mormonism. But good grief: After responding to the same shallow, complacent, disingenuous, dreary, monotonous arguments over and over and over again, the exercise really did lose its charm. I can barely bring myself to read the stuff any more. (Paul Owen and Carl Mosser were absolutely right in their famous critique of their fellow evangelicals' attempts to combat Mormonism.) What passes, I guess, for serious discourse over on CARM strikes me, at least in my experience with it, as not only ugly and unchristian in tone but as vacuous and laughable in substance. In an odd sense, I actually regret this. We could profit from better critics -- Fawn Brodie and others have spurred us on to do better history, for example, and have kept us on our toes -- yet, with very few exceptions, we conspicuously lack competent evangelical opponents. But, alas, so long as they think they're unanswerably devastating, they're unlikely to feel much need to improve.Dr. Peterson, does the following statement by Silver Knight pass for serious discourse here at MAD? Why is Silver Knight apparently exempt from all standards of decency while Christians are banned from this board for merely defending their faith. Imagine if a Christian were to say this:Never forget this day. This was the day when you mustered the courage to face the people you spend your life lying about on your miserable little monkey cage of a message board. The day you stared in the face of the people you are paid by your pathetic little 'mini$try' to spread filth about.This was the day you got your due comeuppance. This was the day Mak et. al. cut out your lying tongue, and unmasked you for duplicitous hate-vomiting wretch you are.
WalkerW Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Is this the type of language that Mormons are allowed to use here? Aren't there any moderators. I bet if a Christian ever said anyting 1/4 as disgusting as this, they'd be banned for life from here.Hence, he said, "So I'll take my mod-sponsored vacation. It was worth it."He will be suspended I'm sure.Though I wonder if you have the same opinion of the horrific things said at CARM?And finally, the big question, are you Athanasius?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.