Cold Steel - this probably isn't the thread to do this. If you'd like to discuss it and you think you have a strong case lets take each of the prophecies / miracles , one at a time, you present the evidence you have and I'll present what I found. Sound like a plan? Would be more than happy to start with the prophecy on the civil war. I will allow you to start the threads.
Sparlock is helping Mormons
by cedars 63 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
cofty
Please say yes Cold Steel.
I would love to read those threads.
-
Cold Steel
I have neither the time nor the inclination for a long, drawn out debate, but if you want to discuss it, come on over to the Mormon Dialogue & Discussion Board and we can continue our exchange there. I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "prophecies" and "miracles." Are you seriously saying you can disprove them, and that all of the Mormon prophecies and all of the alleged miracles didn't happen?
I don't know how you can disprove them, but if you think you have something, bring it on. If you can deliver, you'll do something no other anti-Mormon has been able to do.
-
Qcmbr
Shrugs, this was a good chance to put forward some info Cold - surprised you don't want to take it.
As a quick summary to my thoughts on JS and his prophecy I think we apply the tag of 'prophecy' (in most cases) after an event has occurred that can be interpreted as having matched the main elements of some statement. This is similar to the way people will respond to cold reading; finding hits while ignoring the misses. At first reading the JS prophecy on the civil war (I think this one we can call prophecy as it is published in LDS scripture as a revelation from God) is very impressive, especially as it is then backed up by further prophecy preceding the event. Like cold reading however, the main hit overrides the failing details that then need interpretation to explain. Furthermore JS also had several statements that never achieved the tag of 'prophecy' because they never happened but if they had they would surely have been elevated as such.
-
braincleaned
Great post!
-
braincleaned
Shaking my head at Cold Steel and the huge debate around a Jesus that is a man built up in mythology in the first place — a clone of earlier writtings.
So sad to me...
So much better to have a realtionship with Reality. -
jj123jj123
I thought this was an interesting read...
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1hv7v5/what_do_people_think_of_mormons/ -
jgnat
Jesus wrestled with his critics.
Wrestlers wrestle.
Just because a cult wrestles with critics does not make them saints, Jesus or Jesus's representatives.
Wrestlers aren't Jesus either.
-
jgnat
Knowing it is all a fraud, I wondered if a linguist had taken a good look at Smith's materials. Sure enough.
-
Qcmbr
Not certain whether you're taking up the challenge or not Cold! We could go to another board to discuss this but that wasn't what I was aiming at (I think we both know where we stand relative to each other, a discussion regarding the validity of prophecy I suspect has been done to death on those boards and the tone I would probably use would end up with me getting chucked off quite rapidly,a bit like eating a Big Mac in Hindu temple.) I was looking more to explore what constitutes prophecy, how little information is actually given and how it is often surrounded by odd things.
I have to work in a sec. so this is just a quick indicator of what I mean:
History of the Church (vol. 1, pg.301). Joseph wrote, "The people of South Carolina, in convention assembled (in November), passed ordinances, declaring their state a free and independent nation...President Jackson issued his proclamation against this rebellion, called out a force sufficient to quell it, and implored the blessings of God to assist the nation to extricate itself from the horrors of the approaching and solemn crisis."
Since the 'revelation' in D&C 87 was given a month later it takes on a different tone (verse 1 refers to the already passed rebellion not the future start of the Civil War)
Verse 2 suggests that war would be poured out on all nations starting from this rebellion but in reality neither World Wars were linked to the American Civil War. In fact , if you look at the following info it is posible to see how wars have been pretty consistent across the period. What the US Civil War did do however, was introduce serious trench warfare and the wholesale industrialisation of the process.
http://timelineindex.com/content/select/1311/912,1385,1311?pageNum_rsSite=5&totalRows_rsSite=127
http://timelineindex.com/content/select/1311/912,1385,1311?pageNum_rsSite=6&totalRows_rsSite=127
http://timelineindex.com/content/select/1311/912,1385,1311?pageNum_rsSite=7&totalRows_rsSite=127
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/23/the_world_is_actually_safer_than_ever/
That in the event of conflict the South would call on Great Britain is a given considering the cotton trade but Great Britain didn't join the war and therefore didn't call on other nations (its very vague to say that at some time in the future in some war GB would call for help!)
No Israelite remnant rose up to vex the Gentiles unless we are now linking this prophecy to the Middle East (!?)
No consumption of all nations has occurred.
There was no point in standing in Holy places since no second coming happened.
So in total the main hit had already happened (it just looks like its referring to a future event) and everything thereafter is either common knowledge or too vague to be applied.
