Anti-Mormonism; Built On A Shifting Foundation? E. D. Howe.

[Pahoran]

We don't need a definitive naturalistic explanation for the Book of Mormon anymore than we need one for the revelations of James Strang or O Milagre do Sol.

A wealth of mundane plausibilities is enough.

Of course, I routinely move on even when I can't think of any explanations--for example after a David Copperfield show.

Tarski, if you can't tell the difference between stage "magic" and bona fide religious truth claims, then I probably can't help you.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Avatar4321]

We don't need a definitive naturalistic explanation for the Book of Mormon anymore than we need one for the revelations of James Strang or O Milagre do Sol.

A wealth of mundane plausibilities is enough.

Of course, I routinely move on even when I can't think of any explanations--for example after a David Copperfield show.

Shame you do't have a wealth of mundane plausibilities then, but then you would just move on anyway:)

[Tarski]

Tarski, if you can't tell the difference between stage "magic" and bona fide religious truth claims, then I probably can't help you.

Regards,

Pahoran

Sure I can.

Stage magic is harder to explain naturalistically without being told the secret.

Stage magic is harder to explain even though we know it is a trick because it is tacitly admitted to be such.

Sometimes the difference is not that big though. Take someone like Frederick Lenz (a.k.a Rama a.k.a. Atmananda) who was seen levitating in a glowing ball of light by multiple witnesses. Whether to explain that as a sociological phenomenon (a mere legend) or a magic trick is "up in the air" but it doesn't keep me up at night.

While different in flavor and level of sucess, Joseph Smith, Frederick Lenz, James Strang, L. Ron Hubbard, Da Free John, and Benny Hinn are examples of people who made it their business to convince others that they are/were special in some spiritual, divine, or supernatural sense. People fall for it and almost inevitably money changes hands and unsual norm threatening martial or sexual practices emerge with spiritual justifications offered. (Of course, each group agrees that the other one is fraudulant and they cry foul when the obvious comparisons are made)

It is a familiar pattern.

*oddly, the sister missionaries just knocked on my door*

[Bond...James Bond]

Your recommendation is revealing. Is your Wikipedia screen name John Foxe by chance?

https://secure.deser...pedia.html?pg=2

No. I don't edit wikipedia. (And I'm a critic).

Edited March 29, 2012 by Bond...James Bond

[Bond...James Bond]

That would be the case. Not many nonmembers would take an interest in antimormonism. It is usually a battle royal between exmormons and members with the exmormons attempting to get more members in their ranks. .

Well there are the numerous Christian denominations attempting to convert you guys to the correct form of Christianity and the secular critics as well.

[Pahoran]

Sure I can.

Stage magic is harder to explain naturalistically without being told the secret.

And yet, as you've just admitted, you haven't succeeded in explaining the Book of Mormon naturalistically.

And you claim to be loftily indifferent to Mormon truth claims, and yet -- here you are, closing in on 10,000 posts.

Stage magic is harder to explain even though we know it is a trick because it is tacitly admitted to be such.

Sometimes the difference is not that big though. Take someone like Frederick Lenz (a.k.a Rama a.k.a. Atmananda) who was seen levitating in a glowing ball of light by multiple witnesses. Whether to explain that as a sociological phenomenon (a mere legend) or a magic trick is "up in the air"

Pun intended?

but it doesn't keep me up at night.

Well, no. If it kept you up at night, I'd expect to find you on a web forum somewhere, closing in on 10,000 posts as you try to debunk it.

And if you couldn't debunk it, I suppose you'd be lumping it in with things that are generally not accepted and trying to dismiss it that way.

While different in flavor and level of sucess, Joseph Smith, Frederick Lenz, James Strang, L. Ron Hubbard, Da Free John, and Benny Hinn are examples of people who made it their business to convince others that they are/were special in some spiritual, divine, or supernatural sense. People fall for it and almost inevitably money changes hands and unsual norm threatening martial or sexual practices emerge with spiritual justifications offered. (Of course, each group agrees that the other one is fraudulant and they cry foul when the obvious comparisons are made)

"Obvious" comparisons, in which your ideological targets are lumped in with others so they can be dismissed as a group, and meaningful distinctions are glossed over, are the legitimate business of cheap demagogues.

You've reminded us, once again, that the only difference between a pink-neck and a red-neck is that the pink-neck can find sophisticated-sounding arguments to justify his a priori rejection of things he thinks himself too grand to take seriously.

It is a familiar pattern.

Indeed it is. I've spent quite a bit of time on Huffington Post lately.

*oddly, the sister missionaries just knocked on my door*

Never mind. I'm sure it will wash off.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Okrahomer]

No. I don't edit wikipedia. (And I'm a critic).

Yes, I gathered that from your comments--so is John Foxe.

[Bond...James Bond]

Yes, I gathered that from your comments--so is John Foxe.

Well them I'm not John Foxe. If I was John Foxe I would change the spelling of my name to John Fox.

[Okrahomer]

Well them I'm not John Foxe. If I was John Foxe I would change the spelling of my name to John Fox.

I suspect, though I cannot be sure, the "professor" behind the screen name identifies with this John Foxe:

http://www.johnfoxe.org/

By the way, did you read the newspaper article I previously linked? Be careful, it could shake your faith...in Wikipedia.

[Bond...James Bond]

I suspect, though I cannot be sure, the "professor" behind the screen name identifies with this John Foxe:

http://www.johnfoxe.org/

By the way, did you read the newspaper article I previously linked? Be careful, it could shake your faith...in Wikipedia.

I didn't read it. I don't have any faith in wiki anyway. I might use it for bare bones background research if I want to learn something but I don't use it for substantial stuff (although they often have some pretty cool maps and images on wiki).

[LeSellers]

*oddly, the sister missionaries just knocked on my door*

You're wrong even on this: Sister Missionaries are always in pairs, not odds.

Lehi

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Believe it or not some people have heard of wikipedia before. If you found any links from the wiki page you found profound you should have cited them specifically.

I have confidence in the readers, they do not need to be led around by the nose. I actually found the article while researching a non related topic. I also was not excited about Wiki or under the impression that no one had heard of it. So if you find nothing a value in it, go board nanny elsewhere.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I didn't read it. I don't have any faith in wiki anyway.

So you are here to criticize something you did not read?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Well them I'm not John Foxe. If I was John Foxe I would change the spelling of my name to John Fox.

Or would it be Fox...John Fox?

[Jaybear]

Tarski, if you can't tell the difference between stage "magic" and bona fide religious truth claims, then I probably can't help you.

So wise one, which is stage magic, which is bona fide religious truth:

JS purporting to locate treasure buried beneath the earth by peering at stone in his hat.

JS purporting to translate an ancient manuscript into KJ english by peering at a stone in his hat.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So wise one, which is stage magic, which is bona fide religious truth:

JS purporting to locate treasure buried beneath the earth by peering at stone in his hat.

JS purporting to translate an ancient manuscript into KJ english by peering at a stone in his hat.

Is it without precedence in any other faiths?. Or do you believe the actual finger of God wrote the stone tablets? He Moses after all had 40 days to do this work. These are circular question for which no one has answers. Why people hate and fear those not like themselves, we can all relate too.

[mfbukowski]

*oddly, the sister missionaries just knocked on my door*

I guess The Boss hasn't given up on you yet.

[mfbukowski]

You're wrong even on this: Sister Missionaries are always in pairs, not odds.

Lehi

just plain evil....

[thesometimesaint]

Jaybear:

JS doesn't claim to have discovered the location of the plates by use of peering into a stone.

Was that rock glowing or something for him to see the words without light?

[LeSellers]

just plain evil....

But accurate.

Lehi

[mfbukowski]

But accurate.

Lehi

Yup!

[wenglund]

A wealth of mundane plausibilities is enough.

Evidently, faith is alive and well among the "naturalists".

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[cinepro]

It should also be pointed out that the "foundation" of "anti-Mormonism" is Mormonism. It is a negative reaction and engagement with Mormonism, so as Mormonism shifts and changes in its claims and evidences, so to will anti-Mormonism shift and change. I'm not sure why we would expect either to be static.

[Chris Smith]

Evidently, faith is alive and well among the "naturalists".

All propositions are merely probabilistic, so there's a measure of faith involved any time we accept a proposition whose probability is less than 100%. Show me a person who never exercises any faith, and I'll show you a person who's brain dead. But what distinguishes the "faith" of a naturalist from faith in the stronger, religious sense, is that the naturalist tries to limit his faith to high-probability propositions.

[Bond...James Bond]

So you are here to criticize something you did not read?

I've read the anti-mormon article on wiki, its alright I guess for Wiki. I didn't read the article that Okrahomer linked to because I didn't feel like it. If it was meant to cast doubt upon wikipedia I've already got doubts so it would have simply confirmed my already held position about wiki. Sunt non qui mutua eius mortem in MDB?

Edited March 29, 2012 by Bond...James Bond