Gospel Writers, Muhammad, and Joseph Smith

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

I did not say it was. 

And religions teach things to people that they may not know in a myriad of ways and many of those ways conflict. This comes back to things we have discussed over and over.

Yet we don't have 50,000 different approaches to plumbing do we?  But we do for religion that is supposed to reach us things we do not know.  

No, actually there is not much variation in the purpose of religion.

They are all about WHY there is anything. 

[mfbukowski]

Who was it who kept harping that there were no leaders teaching Pragmatism?

How about President Kimball?

See my new thread.

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Who was it who kept harping that there were no leaders teaching Pragmatism?

How about President Kimball?

See my new thread.

What do you think his response would be if I asked him:

1) Is truth relative or absolute?

2) Did the events in the Book of Mormon happen historically?

3) The LDS Church doesn't work for me. Catholicism does. Why should I join the LDS Church?

I have strong suspicions on what his answers would be, but I'm curious what you would say.

Also, do you (or anyone) mind suggesting what President Nelson would say if I asked him these questions?

[MiserereNobis]

On 4/24/2023 at 10:03 AM, Teancum said:

It is not just his, it it yours as well.  If historically, Jesus never existed (I believe he did BTW) then he would have never been resurrected and Christianity is false. Now he did exist. The next historic question is did he rise from the dead and did those who claim to see him really see him and can they be trusted.  History does matter.  Same with JS and the BoM. Did he really see an angel as he claimed?  Did he have gold plates? Did the BoM people really exist?  All are critical to the question about whether the BoM is from God.  Now had JS claimed that it was just a parable that God revealed to him to teach religious truth I think we have a different discussion.

Of course. I've never claimed that history doesn't matter to Catholicism. I was just responding to Mark and his apparent claim that history shouldn't matter in LDS thought.

Edited April 25, 2023 by MiserereNobis

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

I guess each generation has their quirks

I agree if I can change one word . . . . "I guess each generation has their fringe."

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

And religions teach things to people that they may not know in a myriad of ways and many of those ways conflict. This comes back to things we have discussed over and over.

I think the problem is that I feel that you confuse HOW and WHY questions.

HOW things work seems to be very important to you.

How questions in religion (sacrament, ordinances, liturgies, nature of God, etc etc) vary dramatically, but WHY questions in religion almost do not vary at all.

Spencer Kimball:

"Expertise in religion comes from personal righteousness and from revelation."

That is the "how" of religion, based on what the Path to God IS.

Buddhists to Christians, across all boundaries would agree that the key is personal growth, and being the best person, whatever the definition.

The WHY question of all religions is WHY we exist- and what is our purpose.

 

 

[Smiley McGee]

32 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I agree if I can change one word . . . . "I guess each generation has their fringe."

Don’t agree with any of it; it’s sarcasm. 

[Smiley McGee]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Who was it who kept harping that there were no leaders teaching Pragmatism?

How about President Kimball?

See my new thread.

Guilty. Though I’m very confused by your selection of Kimball. He’s not as abrasively dogmatic as McConkie or Fielding Smith, but I’m not sure his talk is the glowing endorsement of pragmatism you’re suggesting it is. Though I will certainly admit to being a novice at best re philosophy.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Smiley McGee

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

GenZ and tide pods, millennials and avocado toast, boomers and murdering people who harmlessly use their driveway to turn around…I guess each generation has their quirks 🤷‍♂️

I think you meant “twerks”.

Also GenX is ignored again. Just the way we like it. 😛

[Smiley McGee]

20 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Also GenX is ignored again. Just the way we like it.

Haha, okay…”GenX and their pity parties.” Boom, roasted. 

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

Haha, okay…”GenX and their pity parties.” Boom, roasted. 

We don’t want pity. That means people are paying attention to us. That is THE WORST!

[Hamilton Porter]

5 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Who was it who kept harping that there were no leaders teaching Pragmatism?

How about President Kimball?

See my new thread.

CFR your new thread on Kimball. Board rules say you need to post a link.

[CV75]

On the positive side, each generation has it perks.

[Islander]

On 4/21/2023 at 1:31 PM, The Nehor said:

That is not true of that investigation since there are manuscripts from the 7th century. There aren’t any complete manuscripts but if you were saying that you should be clear.

It is pretty clear that while you claim to be scrupulous by avoiding pro-Islam sources that you are quite willing and eager to slurp up the interpretations of those that are anti-Islam and call those “the rubber meeting the road”.

I don’t think there was one Quran brought down from heaven and preserved unchanged. I also don’t think your dime-store anti-Islam polemic proves anything either way.

I quoted the Islamic scholars that reviewed ALL the manuscripts that you quoted for 5 years. All I did is share research that is currently available. For 1500 years NOBODY questions the historicity of Islam for fear and political considerations. None such exist concerning the bible, for example. Well, now that some Western scholars have done their homework, it seems that what we thought we knew, based on Islamic sources, is not accurate. Well, so be it. 

Those are the claims of Islam; that is it complete, unchanged, brought down from heaven and that has been unchanged since it was given to Muhammad. IF the claims are true, they HAVE to stand the test of scrutiny. EVERY truth claim must. The elements of my reply to the OP stand, they are factual. My response to your reply is factual, and facts don't care about how you feel.

 

Cheers.

[Islander]

On 4/22/2023 at 5:05 AM, Hamilton Porter said:

The Quran is still a more stable text than the New Testament.

What does that mean? Based on just about any metric, it is demonstrable that the NT has a much stronger claims to historicity and text integrity than the Q'ran. 

[Hamilton Porter]

3 minutes ago, Islander said:

Well, now that some Western scholars have done their homework, it seems that what we thought we knew, based on Islamic sources, is not accurate.

Do you live in a walled off compound in Northern Idaho stocked with firearms?

[Islander]

On 4/23/2023 at 2:01 PM, Hamilton Porter said:

It's not perfectly preserved, but there is amazing continuity between the manuscripts and what we have today. In any case, it's better-preserved than the New Testament, for sure. Furthermore, most scholars are convinced the Constitution of Medina is authentic and historical.

 

 

There are lots of Islamic apologists. He still did not address the latest issues with critics of the islamic narrative. 

[Islander]

7 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Do you live in a walled off compound in Northern Idaho stocked with firearms?

Do you have something of substance to contribute? Any factual information to share? No? OK.

[Hamilton Porter]

9 minutes ago, Islander said:

What does that mean? Based on just about any metric, it is demonstrable that the NT has a much stronger claims to historicity and text integrity than the Q'ran. 

This is the most comical thing I've heard this month.

The birth narratives in Luke and Matthew are absurd. Beautiful, but absurd.

Most Western scholars are convinced the Quran we have today remains largely unchanged since the 7th century, and the Constitution of Medina is authentic.

[Islander]

2 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

This is the most comical thing I've heard this month.

The birth narratives in Luke and Matthew are absurd. Beautiful, but absurd.

Most Western scholars are convinced the Quran we have today remains largely unchanged since the 7th century, and the Constitution of Medina is authentic.

There are very few "western scholars" that are willing to contradict the historical Islamic narrative. But I will give you some:

God’s Path: The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire Robert Hoyland Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015

Meccan trade and the rise of Islam by Crone, Patricia, 2004

Muslims: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (The Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices)
Part of: The Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices (7 books)  | by Teresa Bernheimer and Andrew Rippin  | Sep 4, 2018

Corrections in Early Qurʾān Manuscripts: Twenty Examples (Quran Manuscript Change Studies) by Daniel Alan Brubaker  | May 21, 2019

Your opinion of the NT is irrelevant. Again, most Christian theologians agree that the NT texts are solid, properly attested historically and doctrinally sound. But I'll leave you in peace. I know that you will never take the time to test my assertions by reading any of the material I have set forth. So, you will remain where you are intellectually (wherever that is). Noticed that since you were not able to offer a cogent argument to counter mine you changed the subject. That should tell you something, if you are honest. But I will leave you be.

 

Take care.

[The Nehor]

43 minutes ago, Islander said:

I quoted the Islamic scholars that reviewed ALL the manuscripts that you quoted for 5 years. All I did is share research that is currently available. For 1500 years NOBODY questions the historicity of Islam for fear and political considerations.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL! Oh yes, the entire world lived in perpetual fear of offending Islam since it was founded. Christianity definitely never pushed back against Islam due to political considerations. This is so stupid.

45 minutes ago, Islander said:

None such exist concerning the bible, for example. Well, now that some Western scholars have done their homework, it seems that what we thought we knew, based on Islamic sources, is not accurate. Well, so be it. 

The idea that the Koran didn’t come perfectly from God is a new notion? Do you know any history at all? You are also listening to anti-Islamic polemics. Look for facts, people who can be trusted. People who tell you everything you want to hear are usually lying.

47 minutes ago, Islander said:

Those are the claims of Islam; that is it complete, unchanged, brought down from heaven and that has been unchanged since it was given to Muhammad. IF the claims are true, they HAVE to stand the test of scrutiny. EVERY truth claim must. The elements of my reply to the OP stand, they are factual. My response to your reply is factual, and facts don't care about how you feel.

Okay, Ben Shapiro. Most of your facts are garbage. There are lots of reasons to doubt the authenticity of Islam and the Quran coming forth as taught. You just didn’t present those arguments. You like this myth that Islam has stood completely defended since the birth of the religion and now a couple of cranks have swept the rug out from under them. You don’t think Christians and Jews and Zoroastrians and the like all tried to debate with Islam and prove their religion to be true and Islam false?

This is just dumb. Your feelings about Islam seem to be based on the myth that hordes of people today are scared to challenge Islam and that your political and religious enemies all love Islam and think it is a great religion. Facts don’t care about your delusions.

[mfbukowski]

18 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

CFR your new thread on Kimball

What does this mean?

Go ahead and throw me off the site if you like.

[mfbukowski]

22 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

Guilty. Though I’m very confused by your selection of Kimball. He’s not as abrasively dogmatic as McConkie or Fielding Smith, but I’m not sure his talk is the glowing endorsement of pragmatism you’re suggesting it is. Though I will certainly admit to being a novice at best re philosophy.

Here is your CFR, smiley admits it.

[Smiley McGee]

19 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

CFR your new thread on Kimball. Board rules say you need to post a link.

 

39 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

What does this mean?

Go ahead and throw me off the site if you like.

 

36 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Here is your CFR, smiley admits it.

I’m confused, we CFR the creation of new threads? Site is not that hard to navigate.

Edited April 26, 2023 by Smiley McGee

[CA Steve]

1 hour ago, Islander said:

Again, most Christian theologians agree that the NT texts are solid, properly attested historically and doctrinally sound.

I would assume that all these Christian theologians have strong Scottish ancestry.