Metal Records--Was the Notion Preposterous in Joseph Smith's Day?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Great observation, I'm adding this to my sig line. Might come in handy one day when discussing BoM historicity.

Context matters when using Bill's quotes. Trying to apply this to the BoM is not very effective unless someone were to argue that "alot of books contained things pertinent to the BoM."

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I would love to. Strange that Jeff K even asked the question.

Interesting. I did mention that I read just about every post. I obviously missed his.

[etana]

Absolutely. They didn't even have electric guitars then, let alone tube distortion, floyd rose trems and guy makeup. Although some of my favorite metal bands do have violins, cellos and accordions so i guess they could have made a go and they did have the hairstyles. Pretty sure they didn't have records either back then; not even Victrolas.

[Dan Vogel]

Again, if I make a faith statement is that not ok? Or am I going to get accused of bearing testimony just by making a faith statement. I am aware that it is beyond proof, but hey, Mormons are believers of a kind of supernatural. And is it you that makes the rules for what kind of statements are ok for a reasoned discussion? I don't see why a statement of faith is unreasonable. You have confidence in your lack of faith, do you not? And I see you making statements about your lack of faith and unbelief consistently.

My fellow apologists buy into many other claims that are fundamentally supernatural but not impossible. Why don't you let them be the judge of whether they will buy it or not. I suspect some will and some won't.

You didn

[SkepticTheist]

You might as well ask me to describe how God made the sun stand still.

"And he said: Yea, I will deny, except ye shall show me a sign." (Alma 30:45)

Made it up because it "sounds good"? What do you think apologetics are anyway? Aren't they just mere unproven explanations that are "made up" because they sound good? I mean geez. Of course apologetics are made up. They are explanations that promote faith. And somebody had to come up with them at some point.

I mean, look at your own made up stuff. You made it all up to sound good, and its all faith based for which you have no direct evidence, and you think you can get in peoples heads from a century and a half ago. Aren't you the most sanctimonious person with a glaring double-standard. I'm afraid you are on your own as much with your own made up stuff.

So, what is it you want, quotes from prophets that you don't acknowledge as such, as if my supplying you with quotes will "prove" that God's engineering of circumstance and choreography will convince you? God's engineering of circumstance most certainly is doctrinal.

Elder Donald L. Hallstrom of the Seventy taught the following about an experience with synchronicity that he had on his mission:

"I have always found that when we do the little things correctly, the Lord gives us the strength to accomplish big things. One day my companion and I were walking to an appointment when we both got the feeling that we should go another way. After we changed directions, we noticed a man walking toward us. He was wearing a Brigham Young University sweatshirt. We stopped and asked him about it.

"He said that his sister had traveled across the United States. She had stopped in Provo, Utah, and bought him the shirt at the BYU campus bookstore. Neither he nor his sister was a member of the Church, and he knew nothing about it or BYU. My companion and I were able to teach this man and his wife about the gospel and baptize them. Meeting this man was not a coincidence. The Holy Ghost guided my companion and me to meet him. Because we were following the rules and keeping the commandments, we were able to hear the still, small voice." (Jan Pinborough and Donald L. Hallstrom,

[Nemesis]

Why should I not bear testimony? This board is about "Mormonism" is it not?

From the board guidelines:

No:

Proselyting or

[SkepticTheist]

Agreed.

However, it is my belief that I was baited into saying that before I realized that merely stating an apologetic which is based on my belief does not constitute bearing of testimony.

These gentlemen were trying to assert that doing that constitutes a bearing of testimony.

If that were true, everything that FAIR ever put out on any subject would be a "testimony."

Sir, Please clarify if I am right in this assumption that stating a belief as an apologetic to explain something does not necessarily constitute a testimony. I don't believe that I stated it as a testimony.

Ed Goble

From the board guidelines:

No:

Proselyting or