Posted on 01/19/2011 6:33:49 AM PST by Colofornian
More recently, some Book of Mormon critics have argued that DNA testing of Native Americans has “proved” that they have a genetic code which shows they came from Southeast Asia and not from the Middle East where Book of Mormon peoples (People of Lehi) were located before coming to the New World. However, these critics are not sufficiently well versed in population genetics. If they were they would realize that present DNA testing is not capable of either proving or disproving Nephite/Lamanite origins as based on current Native American populations.
So my spin, other scientists are to stupid to understand DNA and besides you can't disprove the BoM.
How come John Gee isn’t listed as a “mormon scholar” on that page?
Don’t you find it the least bit curious that a person the church and its members hold in high regard due to his persistent efforts to substantiate the papyri used in the Book of Abraham isn’t used as a “testimony”?
Maybe Professor Ritner has some clues...?
Making an assertion without viewing the data is deceit, plain and simple. We see that same dishonesty daily at FR from the Mormonism apologists working this website.
Yup.
Standard Mormon church PR line.
Standard LDS FREEPER apologist PR line.
Chips off of the old block.
As you said, how many times have we heard certain Lds FREEPER assertions minus even one second of reviewing the data...
...is deceit, plain and simple.
Agreed!
I notice as soon as you mention the faults of mormonism, the mormons defenses start to rise and they don't want to listen to the truth. But I think if they were to hear the message that Jesus offers his salvation freely, he loves you no matter what, no works required to be saved, in a positive and loving way, they may listen. That's why I like watching Charles Stanley. He's just calming when he speaks and I love the way he talks about having a relationship with Christ.
When are you going to debunk something? Still waiting..... and waiting..... How about you use some of that energy to learn something? Nah... that wouldn’t fit your agenda huh?
How do you interpret the following passage from the bible?
Gal 1:6-9
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!
A new link?
No I have posted it before and posted threads from it several times. Just showing one of your gang members that they have no point.
THX 1138
Mormon Scholar: “Obviously you are not looking hard enough, perhaps you should dig deeper.”
Real Scientist: “We struck magma...”
Mormon Scholar: “Ah! Well then the artifacts burned up, so we know they were there because of the burning in our bosom...”
Real Scientist: “Um, there is lava on your jacket...”
Not playing your silly game. Look it up.
Since you evidence that you haven’t even read through your own link spam, how would you know if Godzilla has refuted one or more of the blasphemies in Mormonism?
HAHAHA
There are people who don’t know and there are people who don’t know they don’t know and dragon I am not talking about you.
I don't understand what's so silly about Gal. 1:6-9
And I don't know what's so silly about how you interpret that? It's just a straight up question.
I love this one in particular: http://promormon.blogspot.com/ It is filed with love for everyone (roll eyes). Really PD it is an anti-Christian. Can’t you find sites that promote mormonISM and are not anti-Christian.
http://www.whyfaith.com/book-of-abraham-analysis/
FTA:
Final Thoughts
Even if we were to accept the argument that these are, somehow, not the papyri that Smith used to translate the BoA, we are left with a seemingly implausible situation. Namely that among the traditional Egyptian funeral documents such as the Book of Breathings that were buried with mummies were also tucked in the only remaining copies of documents containing the secret writings of Abraham and Joseph. Not only that, but we would also have to believe that the early Mormon church managed to carefully preserve only those portions of the papyri that were NOT part of the Book of Abraham or Joseph; that is, they preserved only part of the pagan burial texts and none used to for the actual translations! That does not seem at all plausible.
Say there's a mormon reading this thread. How do you think it looks to him or her if a person, like you, who is supposedly defending mormonism can't explain Gal 1: 6-9 or how it affects the Book of Mormon. Don't you think by not answering it, by only posting links puts a serious crack in your defense?
You can't call what people are posting here anti-mormon propaganda if you can't defend it personally. From the outside, it looks extremely weak. People tend to go on the side of reason. IF the facts presented by a person seem reasonable, most will people go along with it. When a person can't or won't engage in a debate but only posts links, that persons credibility shrinks and so does the issue they are supporting. If you can't defend your faith with out links, what good is that faith?
The “blogger” really has it in for Shawn Mcraney [sp?] an ex-mormon who has a web based program about mormonism.
Many of his posts are targeted directly at him, aren’t really “pro-mormon” at all.
Seems like it’s just his webpage where he can post his ravings against Shawn.
Intellectually and spiritually empty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.