the incredible expanding, shrinking, and disappearing Lehites

[mfbukowski]

So says every non-Mormon Christian, JW, Wiccan, atheist, Scientologist, and Muslim. All can claim and show clear evidence of change in their lives as a result of conversion. I fail to see how the test proposed here provides conclusive evidence of scriptural truth.

To do so you would need to generate a clear cause-effect relationship in order to eliminate the strong possibility of psychological confirmation bias, the higher probabilities of 19th century fakery, and show how such evidence could not be affected by other outside influences.

Here we go again.

There is no such thing as a clear logically provable causal relationship, and Hume proved that 300 years ago.

You need to get up to speed on this stuff.

Please prove to me that you love your wife. How do we test that and prove you are not faking? Or are you lying when you say you love her?

Is it true or false that you love your wife? Prove it. You are committing a category error by confusing the verification of personal experiences with third- person observable phenomena.

It is a logical error, but I don't suppose you understand that concept.

It is like trying to prove that courage is green or weighs 22 ounces per cup. Category error. You are using the wrong method of verification.

[Jason]

how are those facts verifiable or testable?

I would have thought that was obvious.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Back under the bridge with you....

I concur.

[Jason]

So says every non-Mormon Christian, JW, Wiccan, atheist, Scientologist, and Muslim. All can claim and show clear evidence of change in their lives as a result of conversion. I fail to see how the test proposed here provides conclusive evidence of scriptural truth.

Two points:

1) You left out part of my testimony - that God had verified the truth of the book. Yes people world over can claim that their lives were changed by their religious faith. Do they also claim that God verified a specific truth claim of their faith to them personally? I rather suspect that you will find that group to be much, much smaller.

2) The experiences of others cannot be used either to verify or discredit my own experiences, because I have no direct access to them as I do to my own experiences. Comparing the accounts of others to my own experiences would be comparing apples to oranges.

[Craig Paxton]

You just don't get this at all.

They have been verified and tested by millions of others.

Here we go again.

There is no such thing as a clear logically provable causal relationship, and Hume proved that 300 years ago.

You need to get up to speed on this stuff.

Please prove to me that you love your wife. How do we test that and prove you are not faking? Or are you lying when you say you love her?

Is it true or false that you love your wife? Prove it. You are committing a category error by confusing the verification of personal experiences with third- person observable phenomena.

It is a logical error, but I don't suppose you understand that concept.

It is like trying to prove that courage is green or weighs 22 ounces per cup. Category error. You are using the wrong method of verification.

I would have thought that was obvious.

Two points:

1) You left out part of my testimony - that God had verified the truth of the book. Yes people world over can claim that their lives were changed by their religious faith. Do they also claim that God verified a specific truth claim of their faith to them personally? I rather suspect that you will find that group to be much, much smaller.

2) The experiences of others cannot be used either to verify or discredit my own experiences, because I have no direct access to them as I do to my own experiences. Comparing the accounts of others to my own experiences would be comparing apples to oranges.

I rest my case...thank you...I couldn't have done it without each and everyone of you.

[mfbukowski]

Two points:

1) You left out part of my testimony - that God had verified the truth of the book. Yes people world over can claim that their lives were changed by their religious faith. Do they also claim that God verified a specific truth claim of their faith to them personally? I rather suspect that you will find that group to be much, much smaller.

2) The experiences of others cannot be used either to verify or discredit my own experiences, because I have no direct access to them as I do to my own experiences. Comparing the accounts of others to my own experiences would be comparing apples to oranges.

Two very good points, succinctly stated!

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I rest my case...thank you...I couldn't have done it without each and everyone of you.

And what a poorly fought case that is. And to think you are actually proud of what you havn't accomplished.

[Tarski]

Two points:

1) You left out part of my testimony - that God had verified the truth of the book.

and who or what verified that it was God?

2) The experiences of others cannot be used either to verify or discredit my own experiences, because I have no direct access to them as I do to my own experiences. Comparing the accounts of others to my own experiences would be comparing apples to oranges.

It amazes me that people just accept statements like this.

There are a heck of a lot of dubious metaphysical assumptions underlying the very notion of "direct access to experience". It is just not true that one can't be mistaken about what one experience; Even when I say merely that it seemed red, I may be wrong.

Consider how much better off would be the mad man if he would just put some due weight on the experiences of others. (the man in apartment 6C isn't really send harmful rays to destroy or control my mind)

Secondly, the way it seems to a person (what they say they experienced or even what they experienced) just isn't ultimately where its at when it comes to figuring out what is or isn't the case about the objective world of atoms, history, or even angels and Nephites..

[Jason]

and who or what verified that it was God?

God did.

It amazes me that people just accept statements like this.

There are a heck of a lot of dubious metaphysical assumptions underlying the very notion of "direct access to experience". It is just not true that one can't be mistaken about what one experience; Even when I say merely that it seemed red, I may be wrong.

Was I arguing that one can't be mistaken?

Secondly, the way it seems to a person (what they say they experienced or even what they experienced) just isn't ultimately where its at when it comes to figuring out what is or isn't the case about the objective world of atoms, history, or even angels and Nephites..

How does one determine that there is an objective world, when all of our experience with it is of necessity subjective?

[Craig Paxton]

"Faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction--faith in fiction is a damnable false hope"... Thomas A. Edison

Good folks of MADB, all I'm really trying to point out is that Mormonism would have a whole lot more credibility if there was some tangible facts available to support it's many claims. If for example someone could produce a senine, seon, shum or even a limnah. Surely these were plentiful and in wide use. Coins and other artifacts from other ancient civilizations are quite common and support the fact that these civilizations actually exisited.

And until something...anything can be produced that demonstrates that these Book of Mormon civilizations actually existed...they will remain fiction.

BTW, can anyone name one other "real" civilization that actually existed on this earth that left absolutely nothing behind as evidence of its existance that you also believe existed?

I'm waiting....

[Zakuska]

Why does the current discussion remind me of Quantum Mechanics?

Our world may be a Giant Hologram

[Zakuska]

Good folks of MADB, all I'm really trying to point out is that Mormonism would have a whole lot more credibility if there was some tangible facts available to support it's many claims. If for example someone could produce a senine, seon, shum or even a limnah. Surely these were plentiful and in wide use. Coins and other artifacts from other ancient civilizations are quite common and support the fact that these civilizations actually exisited.

That would be some feat since the BOM never claims coins were used. (Latter added chapter headings not with standing)

[Vance]

To support my position I quoted Boyd K. Packer

[Deborah]

Good folks of MADB, all I'm really trying to point out is that Mormonism would have a whole lot more credibility if there was some tangible facts available to support it's many claims.

Some of us believe those facts exist. There were the 11 witnesses, the many witnesses to Joseph receiving revelation and in fact others who were part of receiving those revelations; miracles including many healings, and the Book of Mormon text itself for which many scholars can point to distinctive Hebraisms. Just because you don't agree with the facts presented doesn't mean they don't exist.

[Vance]

Good folks of MADB, all I'm really trying to point out is that Mormonism would have a whole lot more credibility if there was some tangible facts available to support it's many claims. If for example someone could produce a senine, seon, shum or even a limnah. Surely these were plentiful and in wide use. Coins and other artifacts from other ancient civilizations are quite common and support the fact that these civilizations actually exisited.

Something tells me that you would reject the evidence when shown to you.

Try this one.

http://bominspection.blogspot.com/2007/05/alma-11.html

[mfbukowski]

Secondly, the way it seems to a person (what they say they experienced or even what they experienced) just isn't ultimately where its at when it comes to figuring out what is or isn't the case about the objective world of atoms, history, or even angels and Nephites..

Speaking of atoms, how does this apply to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

How "objective" is all that anyway? Seen any strings lately?

[mfbukowski]

Even when I say merely that it seemed red, I may be wrong.

Go ahead and show me how I would know if you are right or wrong about that one.

Talk about non-falsifiable statements.....

[mfbukowski]

"Faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction--faith in fiction is a damnable false hope"... Thomas A. Edison

Good folks of MADB, all I'm really trying to point out is that Mormonism would have a whole lot more credibility if there was some tangible facts available to support it's many claims. If for example someone could produce a senine, seon, shum or even a limnah. Surely these were plentiful and in wide use. Coins and other artifacts from other ancient civilizations are quite common and support the fact that these civilizations actually exisited.

And until something...anything can be produced that demonstrates that these Book of Mormon civilizations actually existed...they will remain fiction.

BTW, can anyone name one other "real" civilization that actually existed on this earth that left absolutely nothing behind as evidence of its existance that you also believe existed?

I'm waiting....

And so the suspicion of your trollship is totally confirmed. You have come out of the closet. Surprise Surprise.

Prove to me you love your wife.

Na, don't bother. You are a waste of time. Go read one of the other nine thousand threads which have already answered this.

[Tarski]

God did.

I guess you can see what is wrong with that--right?

[Tarski]

Speaking of atoms, how does this apply to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics

If one's interpretation of quantum mechanics involves the notion of consciousness (as opposed to measurement -possibly done by a machine) then one is in serious trouble. Consciousness better not figure in a theory about simple fundamental objects as long as conscious is a terms of major confusion--no one agrees on its meaning and some deny it even has a unitary useful meaning at all.

We don't need such interpretations. Physics works fine in the lab without such mysticism.

and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

I don't see the problem. If it turns out that the atom behaves in a surprising way that defies forming a naive particle picture, that does not deprive it of objective existence.

How "objective" is all that anyway?

quite

Seen any strings lately?

I consider strings to be speculative. Maybe you should use electrons as an example.

What is your point? Objectivity isn't just about what can be seen with the unaided eye.

[Tarski]

Prove to me you love your wife.

Dude! Seriously. Do you not realize how sophomorpic that sounds? Next you will be asking him to explain the taste of salt. LOL

If you think for one minute that considering how one knows that one loves one's wife is either a well formed or even interesting epistemological question then you need to start over in your philosophical education. It is even more embarrassing if you think that such considerations have something to teach us about how one does or doesn't know whether the Book of Mormon is fictional or not.

For most of us, the question is more than whether that book affects lives in a spiritual way or not. The Lord of the Rings does that and better.

[maupayman]

That would be some feat since the BOM never claims coins were used. (Latter added chapter headings not with standing)

I disagree. The units of measurement argument makes little sense. I started a thread on this in the past:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/35216-nephite-coinage/

[rodheadlee]

I disagree. The units of measurement argument makes little sense. I started a thread on this in the past:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/35216-nephite-coinage/

Actually there is a new thread on this that makes good sense.

[Jason]

I guess you can see what is wrong with that--right?

The wink was because I knew you would find the answer inadequate. It is the basic truth, though.

And by the way, I never did say you can't be mistaken about personal experience.

[Craig Paxton]

Back under the bridge with you....

I concur.

I understand that it makes it easier to discount and mentally manage my questions by using your "troll" reference. And although I completely understand how this makes it easier for you...wouldn't we all benefit by dropping the ad hominem attacks. These do nothing but muddy the waters.

I'm a truth seeker...who would sincerely like Mormonism to be all it claims to be. And taking the onus on myself, I just find Mormonism impossible to believe.

Have I misunderstood something? Perhaps I have. Do I give greater weight to some things at the expense of other items....I believe we are all guilty of doing this.

With respect to the original subject of this post...Knowing what I know, I find it unbelievable that the bronze-aged Christian Civilizations with all of their peculiarities and unique characteristics described in the Book of Mormon ever existed. I cannot wrap my brain around a Nephite Nation that supposedly existed