Replies

I notice you keep bringing up the flat earthers, are you one of them?

Are you trying to be mean to me DU?

Your premise which you conveniently cut off from the Quote was "If you are claiming the bom to be that second witness, then it first stands and falls upon the credibility of the writer – Joseph Smith" Your premise that the writer is the only support is flawed, and is the "Standard of man" that you accuse me of using.

Not really DU, as the originator of the BOM, his credibility is more than fair play

There is of course the work itself, testimonies of others, and in the case of something that purports to be scripture, God's testimony of lack thereof.

Fine, the work itself – no archaeological or anthropological support, plagiarism from the KJV, anachronisms out the wazoo. Contradicts other mormon doctrines. This is just the short list, the work itself fails to stand on its own.

Testamony of others – David Whitmey, one of the Three Witnesses wrote this: About the same time that I came out, the Spirit of God moved upon quite a number of the brethren who came out, with their families, all of the eight witnesses who were then living (except the three Smiths) came out; Peter and Christian Whitmer were dead. Oliver Cowdery came out also. Martin Harris was then in Ohio. The church went deeper and deeper into wickedness (An Address to all Believers in Christ, by David Whitmer, 1887, pp.27-28

Joseph Smith denounced them and their character in the strongest manner – why believe them.

Please explain how Joseph a boy with three years of education wrote this huge book with systems of government, systems of weights and measures, societies, and geography from the Middle east that he could not have known all accurately portrayed, and never made a mistake in one pass, this being his first such work. Experienced writers cannot do that easily, or at all.

When he plagerized wholesale from the bible, his work is considerably reduced. Second, he didn’t work alone – he had his helper scribes who could have contributed to the work. And never make a mistake – ROTFLAICGU! I guess 4000+ changes don’t count as mistakes, even significant changes as recent as the early 1970’s.

How could Joseph possibly have known the route from Jerusalem to Naholm to Bountiful and portrayed it so accurately that we can follow the trail today and find the only place on the coast that meets with the description of Bountiful? indeed, the Valley, the wadi that flows year round, how?

As I stated earlier, the only thing found are the intials NMH, in a culture that was non Hebrew. That is what your whole premise rests. The so-called site of Bountiful no where near fits the description.

How could he have known to put Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon?

Yawn. Fellow mormons do not believe at face value Chiasmus :

Book of Mormon Authorship has made a prima facie case for the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon. It fails, however, to respond to scholarly criticism in some crucial areas. For example, since Welch first published his study on chiasmus in 1969, it has been discovered that chiasmus also appears in the Doctrine and Covenants (see, for example, 88:34-38; 93:18-38; 132:19-26, 29-36), the Pearl of Great Price (Book of Abraham 3:16-19; 22-28), and other isolated nineteenth-century works. Thus, Welch's major premise that chiasmus is exclusively an ancient literary device is false. Indeed, the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon may be evidence of Joseph Smith's own literary style and genius. Perhaps Welch could have strengthened his premise by demonstrating that the parallel members in the Book of Mormon consist of Semitic word pairs, the basis of ancient Hebrew poetry. Without such a demonstration, both Welch's and Reynold's arguments from chiasmus are weak. (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 16, No. 4, Winter, 1983, p. 141-143)

The chiasms that Mormon researchers find all over the Book are, in fact, a result of the incredible amount of repetition contained therein, and are well within the bounds of probability. This, coupled with the rather loose definition of a chiasm employed by the researchers, wherein they can include only those elements which fit the structure, and discard those elements which don't, results in a large number of imaginary chiasms in the Book.

How could he have known that now they would begin to find Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters?

A wimpy article that cherry picked sentences from other articles. I’ll pick one item cited in your reference:

Demotic magical papyrus of London - Its importance for the deciphering of the demotic script by the help of the numerous glosses in Graeco-Coptic characters. The Maxwell is deceptive in saying that the underlying origional text was Northwest Semitic tongue, an early form of Hebrew/Canaanite, where it appears the Gnostics the document is associated with borrowed the Semitic words, rather than vice versa. Infact they shoot themselves in the foot by agreeing with me Egyptian scribes were sufficiently versed in the Northwest Semitic tongue that they were able to transliterate it using their own writing system (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2012873/posts )

How could he have known that in the modern day we would find the Ten Commandments in america written in a form of Hebrew no one in his day could read?

ROTFLAICGU! I see you stopped using the website that specifically states mormons visited the Los Lunas stone and discarded it as even evidence!!!!!!! But did you read this website either???? Lookie here:

Further speculation involved the authorship of that rock inscription.Some even considered it to be an inscription from a member of one of the lost tribes of Israel. Others have expressed the thought that perhaps some Mormons may have carved this message in an attempt to support their views of an ancient pre-columbian semitic history in North America. However, a simple research on Mormon Web sites reveals absolutely nothing about this rock inscription. It is not used by their church as a proof for the existence of ancient Nephites in America. For a certainty it is not written in so-called "reformed Egyptian" language
http://www.mhccorp.com/archaeology/decalogue-background.html

Bawwwaaahhhh, you are 0 for 2 on this evidence DU.

How could he have known there would be other stones with ancient Hebrew on them, again this form of Hebrew which nobody knew how to read or write? Once again, failure to read the website, several options are given
1. Cherokee
2. Hebrew, but Masonic
3. Welsh Coelbren

And from another site about the stone:

Those who have believed the Bat Creek Stone to be a forgery of fraud, include Dr. Charles Faulkner, anthropologist at the University of Tennessee and Jefferson Chapman, Director of the U.T. McClung Museum. They believe that Emmert perpetrated the fraud. My researches indicate that Emmert himself, was a victim of the fraud, set up to send in a fraudulent engraved stone so he would get fired, for the second time. If this is evidence for the bom – then were are the rest of the artifacts? Where is the great mormon city that would be associated with it?

How did he know they would start finding records inscribed on metal plates, in his day it was unheard of.

Broken clock

How did he know that it is now common to find along with the book of breathings other scriptural works buried with mummies? no one knew it back then.

On the contrary, considerable numbers of these documents were found and the finds in Egypt were widely disseminated. Further, the man Smith bought it from could have easily passed the information too. Another red herring.

How did Joseph smith a backwoods boy from America, with a total of three years of education drain the swamps at Nauvoo, build houses and roads that were a marvel of his day and design and construct temples that were beyond the engineering of his day? how?

All by himself – wow no one else with the skill and knowledge but him. I doubt that piece of fiction. Same too with the temples, the technology was well in place at that time.

Joseph is long gone, how come millions have read his Book of Mormon translation and prayed to God to see if it was his word and received an emphatic YES direct from God?

Yes, millions have been fooled by a false emotional feeling involked by the used car salesmen on bicycles. Millions of others have done the same and received an emphatic NO direct from God

Your answers to date have been to say it was Satan, or a trick, or it's not peer reviewed, you have not answered the questions, you have dodged them.

If I were dodging, I wouldn’t be writing such long, detailed posts. Yes, there are multiple answers to the specific issues, some are fooled by Satan, some by the by the desires of their own heart, some by many other combinations of things. Forgeries, deliberate stretching of evidence (as you commonly post), lack of improperly critiqued research and so-called findings, etc. What happens when mormons peer review among themselves and the results of the author are counter to mormon doctrine – most of the time they are censored, forced to drop out of the limelight and even excommunicated.

The Book of Mormon does not rest upon Joseph Smith only, any more than the Gospel of God rested upon Jesus Christ the man.

No, it doesn’t. It also relies upon external evidences (archaeology, textural criticism, etc), the credibility and validity of witnesses, and internal consistency with mormon doctrinal documents. The bom fails on all of these counts DU.

The man Jesus Christ was vilified, arrested illegally, tried illegally, beaten publicly, and murdered on a cross between two thieves. …..snip………Joseph is cast from the same mold,

Joseph Smith never died for my sins as God the Son either.

Given Smith’s prior troubles and the reason for his legal jailing (ordering the illegal destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor), it was more likely a natural understanding of his likely fate.

Your premise is a flawed premise that a man is the measure of his works, the reverse is true. The works of a man are his measure. and Joseph's works are great indeed.

Yep, Texas is just one of them.

I'll respond to the rest of your monster post later when I have time...

I wait with bated breath, and now in the immortal words of the prophet if bid you adieu.

I Said: I notice you keep bringing up the flat earthers, are you one of them?

U Said: Are you trying to be mean to me DU?

I assure you that were I "trying to be mean to you, you would not have to ask. However, you do seem to have a fetish with the Flat Earthers for some reason.

I Said: Your premise which you conveniently cut off from the Quote was "If you are claiming the bom to be that second witness, then it first stands and falls upon the credibility of the writer – Joseph Smith" Your premise that the writer is the only support is flawed, and is the "Standard of man" that you accuse me of using.

U Said: Not really DU, as the originator of the BOM, his credibility is more than fair play

You either misrepresented your position then, or you are changing it now. you plainly stated in Post 1190 "If you are claiming the bom to be that second witness, then it first stands and falls upon the credibility of the writer – Joseph Smith" and now you say it is "Fair Game" I guess my arguments that the contents might have some bearing on the credibility of a book are finally making their way into your ceranium. Also, you again assert that Joseph smith "Wrote the Book of Mormon" when in fact he only claims to have translated it. Does the Bible stand or fall based on the personal worthiness of it's translators? The idea is absurd, yet by asserting that Joseph "originated" the Book of Mormon, you bolster your claim that he should be the standard by which it is judged, thus you beg the question, IT's funny, you guys just can't seem to debate without assuming Mormons are Deceived as part of the assumptions for the debate, it weakens all your arguments because anyone not already convinced sees the weakness of needing that assumption to make your reasoning work.

I Said: There is of course the work itself, testimonies of others, and in the case of something that purports to be scripture, God's testimony of lack thereof.

U Said: Fine, the work itself – no archaeological or anthropological support,

There is indeed evidence for, not proof of, you just dismiss it without critically examining it because it does not fit with your existing beliefs. This is one of the reasons I find it telling that you keep bringing up the flat earthers. I hope you realize that "Orthodox Christianity" is the biggest historical supporter of the theory of a flat earth, people were put to death for believing the earth was round and that sun moved around it. Orthodox Christianity resisted all the evidence and refused to admit there even was any, until the sheer weight forced them to admit the earth was round. You represent Orthodox Christianity in this debate, you continue to deny evidence for and I have no interest in crushing you with proof, you do well to bring up the flat earth believers, however, yours is the side that was pro flat earth and the "majority"'s methods and tactics have not changed much.

I have given much evidence for, you dismissed it, here is a short list of Book of Mormon Evidences from Jeff Lindsay.com. I could do more, but this is going to be to big of a post as it is.

U Said: plagiarism from the KJV,

Have you ever repeated yourself? Was it plagerisem, you again beg the question, if the Book of Mormon is indeed Gods word, can God plagerize his own words in the Bible?

U Said: anachronisms out the wazoo.

So does the Bible...

U Said: Contradicts other Mormon doctrines.

The Bible contradicts itself too, so? Here is a list of Bible contradictions, compiled by Non Mormons

U Said: This is just the short list, the work itself fails to stand on its own.

Actaully it is a remarkable work that has many proofs built right in.

U Said: Testimony of others – <Snip>

It's David Whitmer, and yep he slipped into apostasy and left the church as did many others, but he never recanted his testimony of the Book of Mormon, which is unusual in someone who becomes disaffected with a Mormonism. (How many Anti Momrons here are ex Mormons? Lots.)

U Said: Joseph Smith denounced them and their character in the strongest manner – why believe them.

Because when they repented and came back he frankly forgave them and welcomed them back into the church, also because they held true to a testimony when there was no reason to and every reason not to except that it was true.

U Said: When he plagerized wholesale from the bible, his work is considerably reduced.

Really, can you please tell me how many pages were copies of what's in the Bible?

I also note that you have no problem with many of the gospels being rewrites of another gospel with that apostles insights, I guess they are plagerists too in your book...

U Said: Second, he didn’t work alone – he had his helper scribes who could have contributed to the work.

Joseph was all but illiterate when the Book of Mormon was translated, the scribes were writing down his words, and there are witnesses.

U Said: And never make a mistake – ROTFLAICGU! I guess 4000+ changes don’t count as mistakes, even significant changes as recent as the early 1970’s.

Jerald and Sandra Tanner can only find 3,913 changes without going to punctuation, of the 3,913 changes most are grammatical and spelling corrections, and to quote the Tanners themselves on this:

"As we stated earlier, most of the 3,913 changes which we found were related to the correction of grammatical and spelling errors and do not really change the basic meaning of the text." (Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism, Chicago: Moody Pres., 1980, p 131

If you are going to say 4,000 you are including punctuation which was also added to the Bible, If you are going to quote the 3,913 number, you are including spelling changes which also happened with the Bible.

Have you ever written a complex story? My brother is on his 10th rewrite of a Sci Fi novel, because he keeps having to go back and change things (one significant change to his story involves interstellar currency, water for reaction mass, he had to go back and make huge changes in his story line. Joseph never did, the Currencies always work, the political systems always work, and he never went back to edit them to make his story line "work", the reason for this is he was not making it up, but translating an actual history.

I Said: How could Joseph possibly have known the route from Jerusalem to Naholm to Bountiful and portrayed it so accurately that we can follow the trail today and find the only place on the coast that meets with the description of Bountiful? indeed, the Valley, the wadi that flows year round, how?

U Said: As I stated earlier, the only thing found are the intials NMH, in a culture that was non Hebrew. That is what your whole premise rests. The so-called site of Bountiful no where near fits the description.

As I stated earlier, you are wrong, there are people who live there who still call the place Nahom, the place was found by German Archaeologists, then Momrons took the trek, retracing Lehi's path and wound up in the only place in Arabia that matches Nephi's description, as well as finding many of the landmarks Nephi talked about. You can (because you just did) say that this is nothing more than letters scratched on a wall, Saying it does not make it true. There is evidence you can either continue to hide your head in the sand as the church did with the "Round Earth" kooks. The locals in this Video refer to not only the Place Nahom, but the People as well, watch this video: Nahom in The Book of Mormon

This video shows the arabian peninsula and the area called Nephis or bountiful which lines up exactly with the place Nahom described in the Book of Mormon, and by following the directions in the Book of Mormon, you get to first Nahom, then Nephis (bountiful) exactly as described in the Book of Mormon, watch this video: Nephis Bountiful in Arabia: The Book of Mormon

You can continue to hide your head in the Proverbial sand with claims of "no evidence" as your ancestors did when told the earth was round, or you can actually look at evidence that challenges your beliefs.

I Said: How could he have known to put Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon?

U Said: Yawn. Fellow Mormons do not believe at face value Chiasmus :

I have no idea what you are saying here, I guess your Yawn got in the way...

Chiasmus appears in all scripture, often complex, some can only be detected with computers as they span entire verses, people who read the scriptures often will begin unconsciously to speak in Chiasmus, but the chiasmus is never as pronounced or as complex as those found in the scriptures. U Said: The chiasms that Mormon researchers find all over the Book are, in fact, a result of the incredible amount of repetition contained therein, and are well within the bounds of probability.

I thought you said you had read the Book of Mormon...

U Said: This, coupled with the rather loose definition of a chiasmus employed by the researchers, wherein they can include only those elements which fit the structure, and discard those elements which don't, results in a large number of imaginary chiasmus in the Book.

I have seen very complex Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, want a few examples?

What Does Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon Prove?
Book of Mormon Literature
New Statistical Study of Chiasmus: Chance or Design?

IMHO saying Chiasmus is just repetition is like saying poetry is just rhyming some words and can be accounted for by dumb luck.

I Said: How could he have known that now they would begin to find Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters?

U Said: A wimpy article that cherry picked sentences from other articles. I’ll pick one item cited in your reference:

Spare me your efforts to minimize, when Joseph translated the Book of Mormon, There were no known semetic texts written in egyptian characters, it's something that people used to make fun of the Book of Mormon for, now that they have found other records, it's not worth of comment? Your ability to ignore evidence is ... impressive.

I Said: How could he have known that in the modern day we would find the Ten Commandments in america written in a form of Hebrew no one in his day could read?

U Said: ROTFLAICGU! I see you stopped using the website that specifically states mormons visited the Los Lunas stone and discarded it as even evidence!!!!!!! But did you read this website either???? Lookie here:

I use many web links, I have several for Los Lunas stone:
the Hebrew stone with Ten commandments found in america: http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/15_loslunas.html
The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
Is this the world's oldest surviving inscription of the Ten Commandments?
The Los Lunas Hebrew Inscription

Then there's: The Newark, Ohio Decalogue Stone and Keystone
The Bat Creek stone
Burrows Cave

I could continue to throw things at you, but like the flat earthers of old and of today you will deny each one successively until at the end you will crow "See you have no evidence" thus making an Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

An appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence.

I have reasons other than the "evidence", but God not I must show it to you.

U Said: Bawwwaaahhhh, you are 0 for 2 on this evidence DU.

Spoken like a defender of the flat earth society, go read some of their stuff, it sounds eerily like your arguments here.

I Said: How could he have known there would be other stones with ancient Hebrew on them, again this form of Hebrew which nobody knew how to read or write?

U Said: Once again, failure to read the website, several options are given
1. Cherokee
2. Hebrew, but Masonic
3. Welsh Coelbren

The Cherokee did not know how to read and write Ancient Hebrew, the Masons did not know how to read and write Ancient Hebrew, the Welsh did not know how to read and Write ancient Hebrew.

Read the article, not just for quote mining, but for content,t he writing is unquestionably Ancient Hebrew, No one knew how to read or write it when found (that's why they came up with the Cherokee and other theories) most scientists abandoned those theories when Hebrew scholars recognized the writing.

Let's apply Occam's razor here, Which is more likely,

Some ancient language, we'll call it "Whatever" is carved into a stone in the ancient Americas and is just by chance looks virtually the same as ancient Hebrew, and "whatever" they were carving just happens to match the Ten Commandments carved in ancient Hebrew, and on top of that, there just happens to be another stone written in ancient Hebrew dating from the same era found in Israel.

The Book of Mormon is true.

I could go on about Joseph's description of the geography of Lehi's trip, or the records found at qumran engraved on plates, or Chiasmus, or about the other Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon, but as my father once told me, "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" It is obvious to me and to anyone reading this that you are somewhat less than open minded.

You then quote someone who says they think the bat creek stone is a fraud, fine, there are also still people who think the Earth is flat, some of them also have doctorates, so what? Can you prove the Los Lunas stone to be a forgery? Can you explain it in any way that makes sense?

I Said: How did he know they would start finding records inscribed on metal plates, in his day it was unheard of.

U Said: Broken clock

Lame excuse for an obvious support you don't want to admit too.

I Said: How did he know that it is now common to find along with the book of breathings other scriptural works buried with mummies? no one knew it back then.

U Said: On the contrary, considerable numbers of these documents were found and the finds in Egypt were widely disseminated. Further, the man Smith bought it from could have easily passed the information too. Another red herring.

Really? When did this become common knowledge? Was it before 1835, or after? further you suppose the man giving selling the papyri to Joseph could have told him, Great, can you substantiate that? My understanding is that it was uncommon to find much with mummies in that day because most of the tombs had be robbed later as we became better at finding undisturbed tombs, were papyri commonly found with mummies.

I Said: How did Joseph smith a backwoods boy from America, with a total of three years of education drain the swamps at Nauvoo, build houses and roads that were a marvel of his day and design and construct temples that were beyond the engineering of his day? how?

U Said: All by himself – wow no one else with the skill and knowledge but him. I doubt that piece of fiction. Same too with the temples, the technology was well in place at that time.

Really, you have no idea what you are talking about. You should read up on the history of Nauvoo, and the draining of the swamps there, as organized by Joseph Smith. Joseph also designed the Drainage system that was then placed under the whole city, covered drainage was not a common thing in that day and age, but Nauvoo had them. William Weeks was the architect for the Nauvoo temple, Joseph Smith overseeing him, Joseph was directing design, Weeks put the design on paper. see: Nauvoo Temple

Remarkable feats for someone with three whole years of formal education, wouldn't you say?

I Said: Joseph is long gone, how come millions have read his Book of Mormon translation and prayed to God to see if it was his word and received an emphatic YES direct from God?

U Said: Yes, millions have been fooled by a false emotional feeling involked by the used car salesmen on bicycles. Millions of others have done the same and received an emphatic NO direct from God

LOL! Millions have received no? Prove it, I can prove the yes, look at the number of people in the church!

I Said: Your answers to date have been to say it was Satan, or a trick, or it's not peer reviewed, you have not answered the questions, you have dodged them.

U Said: If I were dodging, I wouldn’t be writing such long, detailed posts.

I believe that's exactly why you write such long detailed red herring filled posts.

U Said: Yes, there are multiple answers to the specific issues, some are fooled by Satan, some by the by the desires of their own heart, some by many other combinations of things. Forgeries, deliberate stretching of evidence (as you commonly post), lack of improperly critiqued research and so-called findings, etc.

Can you honestly say that Anti Momrons have never been led by satan, Forged anything, Stretched evidence, or Findings? You can't say that because I can give you specific instances of each of the above, in a simple, one person example, I give you Mark Hoffman, who decided the Church was not true when he lied about a sin and God let him keep going, digging himself in deeper, he became an anti Mormon and continued to attend and pretend, he forged documents like the salamander letter which is the support behind the allegations that Joseph was a treasure seeker and he was led so far5 astray by Satan that he started murdering people to cover up his forgeries. Show me a Mormon who forged things to make the church look good and then wound up murdering people, you can't.

U Said: What happens when Mormons peer review among themselves and the results of the author are counter to Mormon doctrine – most of the time they are censored, forced to drop out of the limelight and even excommunicated.

Funny, Where? I know of people who are not published because their work was not good, I also know people who then "Take it to the press" and immediately get an audience because like the Monty python skit they are crying help, Help! I'm being repressed!", they get a wider hearing that way than by being published in some dusty journal that's only going to be read by other academics.

Let's take a Catholic who works a a Catholic owned College who published a paper claiming that the pope is illegitimate, do you expect the College to actually put their name on such a paper? Of course not. If said person then went to the press saying they were "being repressed", do you think they are on a course that leads to reconciliation, or separation? Separation of course, they are separating themselves from the Catholic church and using the "press" to further their career this move may be calculated, or not, but it's effects lead to a more stained relationship, and if they do not repent publicly (for they made their disagreement with the church public), soon the Catholic church will have no choice but to excommunicate them.

This same process works for any church, even Momrons, it's human dynamics, and a predictable course. At least in todays world, we don't kill people for believing the world is round...

I Said: The Book of Mormon does not rest upon Joseph Smith only, any more than the Gospel of God rested upon Jesus Christ the man.

U Said: No, it doesn’t. It also relies upon external evidences (archaeology, textural criticism, etc), the credibility and validity of witnesses, and internal consistency with Mormon doctrinal documents. The bom fails on all of these counts DU.

IF the same standards are used to measure the Book of Mormon that are used on the Bible, the Book of Mormon does just fine. When you insist that a book full of contradictions is inerrant and then say that any new scripture must be in agreement with it (contradictions and all) you forbid God to correct the errors of men and this simply cannot be so, God speaks where you want him to or not, and he has never been concerned about being peer reviewed.

I Said: The man Jesus Christ was vilified, arrested illegally, tried illegally, beaten publicly, and murdered on a cross between two thieves. ….. snip………Joseph is cast from the same mold,

U Said: Joseph Smith never died for my sins as God the Son either.

No body said he did, More read herrings?

U Said: Given Smith’s prior troubles and the reason for his legal jailing (ordering the illegal destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor), it was more likely a natural understanding of his likely fate.

LOL! Again with the misdirection, Joseph did not order the expositor destroyed, the City Council did, and the had good precedent, several Mormon presses had been destroyed with less legal precedent, but you don't really seem to care about reality and justice, you seem to be madly supporting your flat earth philosophy just as your side did long ago, logic be damned, keep the status Quo!

I Said: Your premise is a flawed premise that a man is the measure of his works, the reverse is true. The works of a man are his measure. and Joseph's works are great indeed.

U Said: Yep, Texas is just one of them.

The more red herrings you throw out, the more obvious it is, did you know?

I Said: I'll respond to the rest of your monster post later when I have time...

U Said: I wait with bated breath, and now in the immortal words of the prophet if bid you adieu.

If?

There is a difference between evidence for and evidence of, Evidence of is supposed to irrefutably prove something, I don't think we'll ever have that kind of evidence about the Book of Mormon, Evidence for is evidence that will confirm to the believer the truth he already believes in, bolstering his faith, and that we have plenty of Evidence for is easily dismissed by the nonbeliever, Christianity has a lot of archeological evidence that is believes and supported by Christians, you said earlier that evidence uncovered by Mormons was invalid because it was from Mormons you also have talked about peer review by people outside of Mormonism, these fallacious stands would destroy much of the archeological evidence you cite for the Bible, if we throw out all the research that has been done by christians because it was not peer reviewed by Moslems, we won't have much left of what I believe to be a great work. the same is true of studies of Mormonism, the place of burila Naholm, the route to bountiful, you would not question if it was somebody finding a route from the Bible, but if it's for Momrons, it's all a lie and falsehood, your Bias is obvious, your reasoning flawed and your conclusions capricious. In short, you bring up the flat earthers all the time because, you are a modern day flat earther, denying the round earth of Mormonism, and it's an resistable comparison, the evidence mounts, and anyone who wants to know the truth can simply follow the command in First John 4:1-3

1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

You have complained about my testimony, asking why mine should outweigh yours or the "Millions" who have received a "No", the answer is simple, and it's contained in the Bible. When I prayed about the Book of Mormon and God answered my prayer, God fulfilled his promise that the answer would have a testimony of Jesus attached in my case it was very specific, a specific testimony of Jesus' life and mission. Any testimony of the Book of Mormon is a testimony of Jesus because it is a book that testifies of him.

Anti's have asked me what I will do when I die and discover that I am wrong...

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
30 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?

He who hath ears to hear let him hear.
I testify to you that these scriptures are true messages from God.
I testify that the Bible and the Book of Mormon together, reinforcing each other are two witnesses testifying of God's merciful plan for his children.
Come unto him, read, learn, and Put our religion to "The Test".
If I am indeed a false witness of Jesus as Godzilla would have you believe, then you have nothing to fear, for God will tell you, if I am indeed a true messenger from God then you have nothing to fear, for God himself will testify of my works.
If you read and act not, you will have no excuse in the great and terrible day of the Lord, "why stand ye in jeopardy every hour?"

choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

God bless you all.