Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is The Book of Mormon Inspired by God?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ishoney_8
    started a topic Is The Book of Mormon Inspired by God?

    Is The Book of Mormon Inspired by God?

    So, just to be open-ended about this, would you be willing to read The Book of Mormon if it meant if it could help you draw closer to God and discover any of life's important questions?

    Would you read it?
    Last edited by ishoney_8; 07-17-2018, 03:09 PM.

  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    Atheism is first an ideology.
    Atheism is merely an absence of a belief in skydaddies. Stating that "Atheism is an ideology" is rather like stating that "Not collecting coins is a hobby".

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    There are some genuine atheist religions
    Examples to substantiate your statement here?

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    but the guys you are discussing with seem to be obsessed with religion,
    I guess people daring to question your empty ranting (this post of yours being a prime example of that) seems to trigger you

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    not practicing an atheist religion.
    There's no Atheist religion, return to the first part of this post and read it again.

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    Obsession with religion among atheists is actually common enough to have become a recognized OCD.
    Verbal masturbation here...

    Ohhhhhh, difficult questions are getting asked which "for whatever reason" you don't seem to have the intellectual capacity to respond to?

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    Sensible people - atheist or not - do not act like this on a pen pal site!
    Let's play a game called "spot the logical fallacy" here

    This poster has made a post with many glaring examples of logical fallacies - but this one is textbook almost to the point of a stereotypical example.

    "Reasoned discussion" from the perspective of a proselytising religious kook being of course one where difficult questions are not being asked....

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    So, why are you still discussing with them?
    Here we go - imploring and begging a fellow proselytiser to censor difficult questions on the principle of "you today me tomorrow"...

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    You have to ignore their posts otherwise you become their enabler.
    The punchline - you have to be one of us and censor those Godless Atheists and their difficult questions, because after all you were not able to answer them and they are also unlikely to answer them.

    Furthermore, if others actually debate what they believe in, then you will continue to be shown up as a gutless wonder who doesn't have the balls to debate your faith in the open even though you try to proselytise it

    Leave a comment:


  • Sancta_Lux
    replied
    Originally posted by fatbeard View Post

    Intelligent design is just a break-off from mainstream creationism and a compilation of science and religion where some of the cult leaders realised that the only way forward in these modern times is to invent a religion that uses the best of both worlds so I would certainly put it on the same level as the rest, it is more cunningly presented and not as clumsy as the book of mormon granted but yet just another branch of fleecing followers financially.
    It's obviously some disguised creationnism, yet the packing is way better and I wouldn't see people who fall in this "hypothesis" as complete idiots. I believe it's easy to find it such tricks, especially not knowing at all the theory of the Evolution because it's more developed than simple creationnism or mormon fantasies, from what I remember, it's also much more older than the tendency of these last years.

    Originally posted by fatbeard View Post
    It would come as absolutely no surprise to me if ID or Creationism is the belief TDLCVI adheres to, he has all the hallmarks they do regarding posting vague nonsense but despite that still always having to be seen to be right and using a whole host of smoke and mirrors excuses why he wont reply in detail with links etc, probably would explain his reluctance to actually admit what his belief is come to that.
    I don't know why anyone would believe in creationism or intelligent design in 2018, I don't see how natural selection actually contest the existence of a God... Both are perfectly compatible for people who are not rigid to the point of reading literally the Bible since it explains "how", not "why" (which is senseless in biology and other sciences).

    Leave a comment:


  • fatbeard
    replied
    Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
    Intelligent design is still more believable than Mormon book or creationism to me... Even if natural selection is really simple to understand widly, it can be a little bit problematic for people who don't pay attention enough or be extremely "weird" for people digging the topic since it's, in fact, really complicated.

    I'm not saying it's smart to believe in intelligent design, btu I wouldn't put it on the same level as some other things your mentionned here.
    Intelligent design is just a break-off from mainstream creationism and a compilation of science and religion where some of the cult leaders realised that the only way forward in these modern times is to invent a religion that uses the best of both worlds so I would certainly put it on the same level as the rest, it is more cunningly presented and not as clumsy as the book of mormon granted but yet just another branch of fleecing followers financially.

    It would come as absolutely no surprise to me if ID or Creationism is the belief TDLCVI adheres to, he has all the hallmarks they do regarding posting vague nonsense but despite that still always having to be seen to be right and using a whole host of smoke and mirrors excuses why he wont reply in detail with links etc, probably would explain his reluctance to actually admit what his belief is come to that.

    Leave a comment:


  • fatbeard
    replied
    ''

    Your obsession and pathological hatred of being wrong follow you around with your every post and reply with this one being no exception The translation of your message to peewee is 'Don't reply to these 2 people that have seen straight through me directly, just reply to someone else about them in public so they can see what you write therefore "enabling" them to reply anyway but you can pretend to yourself you are actually ignoring them'....no surprise there really because you know we know how controlling you are used to being simply from what you have written, if your advice about ignoring anyone was genuine you would have contacted peewee via PM, you read every word we write but when it comes to replying directly and actually refuting something with facts and links like the sensible people here do as with everything else you try you fall short, still thinking and courage have never been your strong points

    In summary TDLCVI strikes again looooooooooool


    Leave a comment:


  • RogerCarmel
    replied
    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post

    atheism is definitely a religion. it is clung to by its adherrents as strictly as other religious people to theirs. you just cant admit it. and no richard dawkins is slightly respectable. He even said christianity is the best defence against radical Islam. he admitted it wasnt atheism.

    Leave a comment:


  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    atheism is definitely a religion.
    And the ritual of going to the pub for a beer is also an organised religion

    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    it is clung to by its adherrents as strictly as other religious people to theirs. you just cant admit it.
    A statement such as "a lack of belief in supernatural Gods" constitutes a whole religious system?

    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    and no richard dawkins is slightly respectable. He even said christianity is the best defence against radical Islam. he admitted it wasnt atheism.
    Source?

    He merely states that Christianity is better than Islam because Christianity has relatively fewer terrorists and might serve as a defence of some sort against Islam. That is not exactly an endorsement of Christianity as a true belief

    Leave a comment:


  • fatbeard
    replied
    Yup, there is that "some college" edumacatium showing again there peewee, and best of all you couldn't even get the name right lol.

    Leave a comment:


  • briancrouse
    replied
    Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

    That's a name that brings out butthurt ranting from religious kooks Charles Darwin also triggers them for some reason...



    Now there's a tu quoque attempt if I've ever seen one



    Terminology such as "kook" used as a descriptor for those who are intellectually challenged who promote their cults/religions/faiths is highly intelligent behaviour - short, sharp, succinct and highly descriptive.



    Obviously you can't be referring to me because I don't have a religion But I guess pointing out to people the glaring fallacies in religions does make those of a promoting religion disposition extremely butthurt at the prospect of not earning points to haleluuyah afterlife death land
    atheism is definitely a religion. it is clung to by its adherrents as strictly as other religious people to theirs. you just cant admit it. and no richard dawkins is slightly respectable. He even said christianity is the best defence against radical Islam. he admitted it wasnt atheism.

    Leave a comment:


  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    Richard Dawkins.
    That's a name that brings out butthurt ranting from religious kooks Charles Darwin also triggers them for some reason...

    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    You realize name calling is very childish
    Now there's a tu quoque attempt if I've ever seen one

    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    and shows a lack of intelligence right?
    Terminology such as "kook" used as a descriptor for those who are intellectually challenged who promote their cults/religions/faiths is highly intelligent behaviour - short, sharp, succinct and highly descriptive.

    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    if you want to promote your religion then you should do it a bit differently.
    Obviously you can't be referring to me because I don't have a religion But I guess pointing out to people the glaring fallacies in religions does make those of a promoting religion disposition extremely butthurt at the prospect of not earning points to haleluuyah afterlife death land

    Leave a comment:


  • briancrouse
    replied
    Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

    Charles Dawkins? Seems you are mixing up your scripts here

    Then again, religious kooks have this habit of trying to red herring discussions when things are not going very well for them...
    Richard Dawkins. You realize name calling is very childish and shows a lack of intelligence right? if you want to promote your religion then you should do it a bit differently.

    Leave a comment:


  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Originally posted by briancrouse View Post
    haha you guys deny your proteletizing but then go on to do just that. you guys are real self denial. I have more respect for Charles Dawkins than you guys. You will never win anyone to your side by calling other people names. it just shows the moral bankruptcy of atheism.
    Charles Dawkins? Seems you are mixing up your scripts here

    Then again, religious kooks have this habit of trying to red herring discussions when things are not going very well for them...

    Leave a comment:


  • briancrouse
    replied
    haha you guys deny your proteletizing but then go on to do just that. you guys are real self denial. I have more respect for Charles Dawkins than you guys. You will never win anyone to your side by calling other people names. it just shows the moral bankruptcy of atheism.

    Leave a comment:


  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Lee Strobel is yet another one of your usual "born-again" kooks:

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lee_Strobel

    As for "proselytising for Atheism", this poster seems unwilling "for whatever reason" to refute claims made by Atheists regarding the lack of evidence and the poor quality and invalidity of any evidence put forward.

    http://forum.interpals.net/forum/int...s-myth-or-fact

    All this "evidence for Jesus" yet this poster doesn't seem too willing to name it "for whatever reason"

    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post
    Give up! Go to a Christian forum. The atheists who post there do not proselytize and actually know what they are talking about for the most part.
    "For whatever reason, RogerRabbit here doesn't care to name these "forums"

    Leave a comment:


  • fatbeard
    replied
    Yet again Walter TDLCVI Mitty strikes again loooooooooooooool and you are wrong again as usual.

    I have not seen any of the Atheists here or a more accurate description in my case the undecided proselytise, all I have seen them do is pour scorn and skepticism on people like you and peewee who both claim to of been visited by god directly and have obvious psychological problems If anything you say is to be believed and of course it isn't you yourself by your own admission can't stand anyone else that doesn't think like you, the nonsense you wrote about your pretend that never existed "Atheist group" where you weren't allowed to join unless you thought exactly like you was the best proof yet, not about Atheists but about your actual pathological hatred of you being seen not to be right so when it comes to "irreversible blindness" look in the mirror if you have the courage

    Both you and peewee are laughing stocks here, not only because of your ludicrous claims but simply because half the time you're both lying for jesus and the rest of the time you are both not telling the truth, it really is as simple as that ''

    Peewee and TDLCVI, I implore you both not to go anywhere else other than here, if anyone is undecided about their beliefs the pair of you fruit-loops will at least make them see the hilarious side of what happens when religion goes wrong




    Leave a comment:

Working...
X