Would it really matter if LDS were in error . . .

[OtherCheek]

My God is the source of reason and truth OC, so why would he talk about cities that didn't exist? Why would he sponsor a prophet that made so many failed prophecies? Why should we over look these short comings, in the BOM and believe anyway?

Faith based upon repeated and consistent spiritual experience is big on my list of things. Also faith based upon repeated and consistent immersion in and study / pondering of the scriptures is big on my list of things. That along with accepting the knowledge that I do not know all things, and God has not revealed all things. But one day, He will.

I'm heading off to bed now. See you later.

[Cow Poke]

I will be going on vacation soon and wish to book a flight to ancient Biblical areas. Would you please tell me where these places are?

The Garden of Eden

Well , Frank ---- check with your Mormon friends -- It's in Missouri!!!!

Here's a map!

adam_ondi_ahman.jpg

Bless your heart!

[OtherCheek]

Yeah, me too... and I'm older than you, so I shoulda already gone.

Gerry Attrick is your name.

[Cow Poke]

Gerry Attrick is your name.

Yeah, and Arthur Itis is yours!

[franktalk]

Can you produce a reason why not or is it 'not to be trusted' because well... it's not to be trusted?

Actually I may be confused. I always thought that scripture told us to use spiritual discernment to receive the message of scripture. So please tell me oh learned one how to interpret the following:

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I always thought the natural man was man's logic and senses. Why don't you tell me what the natural man is?

[lilpixieofterror]

I will be going on vacation soon and wish to book a flight to ancient Biblical areas. Would you please tell me where these places are?

The Garden of Eden
Land of Nod (this is an easy one it is east of Eden)
City of Enoch
The spot where Noah built the ark.
The spot where Noah's ark landed and the ark itself.
The altar that Noah built
The museum that holds the thummim and umin mentioned in Exo 28:30
The museum that holds the Ark of the Covenant

Oh and I want to update my star chart with the location of things mentioned in the Bible.

Please let me know where I can find the exact location for these:

The worlds mentioned in Heb 1:2

Awe, I love these games, but see OC, while there is little doubt that Nazareth existed and many many other sites described in the Bible have shown to have actually existed, as described. The BOM has nothing on that. Likewise, taking some of your things into mind, you got quite some issues such as:

1. How are we suppose to find a garden? The location the Bible describes appears to be in the area of modern Iraq and while it is today a mostly barren desert, it wasn't thousands of years ago. It was actually quite lush towards the end of the last Ice age.
2. What sort of evidence are we suppose to find that a tribal group, that went by the name of Nod, really was in the area?
3. You do know that ancient cities went by several names and uncovering these names (to say the least) is very hard, right? As far as we know, the remains of many ancient cities, are sitting below today's cities (which often is the case, just as those living in Rome, Seville, or Athens that one.
4. What evidence is suppose to exist for a wooden boat? Do you know many boats exist from that era? A hand full and thousands were built, so I guess you believe that the Egyptians only had two boats because that is all we have found?
5. The remains of these buildings are most likely parts of other buildings. You are aware of the process of recycling the remains of old buildings for new buildings, right? The temple, as described in the Gospels is huge, today, only a wall, some tunnels, and some carvings in stones is all that exist.
6. Wow, Heb 1:2 seems pretty general to me and I don't think it's the same thing you are talking about.
7. Finally, you are aware that star charts change from culture to culture and that data gets lost to history, right?

See, the thing is that while many of the holes in the Bible can be reasoned out like this, the BOM doesn't seem to able to, it is one thing to miss a few details here and there (even if we assume that) and not to find everything mentioned and described within (which is common with many ancient works, it took years to find Troy and Pompeii). It is another thing when NOTHING can be archeologically confirmed as existing. Thus the difference between the two.

[franktalk]

Well , Frank ---- check with your Mormon friends -- It's in Missouri!!!!

Here's a map!

Bless your heart!

Now were getting somewhere. Just send me a picture of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and a picture of the tree of life in the garden and I will book my flight.

[lilpixieofterror]

Faith based upon repeated and consistent spiritual experience is big on my list of things. Also faith based upon repeated and consistent immersion in and study / pondering of the scriptures is big on my list of things. That along with accepting the knowledge that I do not know all things, and God has not revealed all things. But one day, He will.

I'm heading off to bed now. See you later.

So why do I have to ignore all the issues with the BOM and instead pray for God to tell me it is true? Does Christianity tell me do this? No, so why does the LDS church, try this method?

[lilpixieofterror]

Actually I may be confused. I always thought that scripture told us to use spiritual discernment to receive the message of scripture. So please tell me oh learned one how to interpret the following:

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I always thought the natural man was man's logic and senses. Why don't you tell me what the natural man is?

This old canard? Is that verse saying to forsake reason, for the sake of 'the spirit' Frank? Yes or no?

[lilpixieofterror]

Now were getting somewhere. Just send me a picture of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and a picture of the tree of life in the garden and I will book my flight.

I love canard, but as I explained to OC, Archeology actually confirms many cities and sites, as described in the Bible, as existing. What about the BOM? Why all the dodging and strawmen? Besides, Southern Cali was once covered in a forest much like you find in Montana back during the last ice age, but today it isn't and you know how much evidence is left over from that? Not very much. You do know that trees rot over time, right? You do know that only a small part of the evidence is preserved for future archeologist to discover, right? Really, how can you be so ignorant of facts like this?

[franktalk]

Awe, I love these games,

Thank you for your response. You are right it has taken thousands of years to uncover the items we have found so far. This is with many many people looking. You are a bright person and my posts here are to point out how easy it is to step on another's ideas and beliefs. But I would like you consider that man's logic is not to be trusted.

[franktalk]

This old canard? Is that verse saying to forsake reason, for the sake of 'the spirit' Frank? Yes or no?

Yes when dealing with man's reasoning but no when dealing with the truth and the reasonable acceptance of it. The problem is many think that man has acquired truth in science and truth in logic. The verse says the natural man can not discern. I think that speaks for itself.

[lilpixieofterror]

Thank you for your response. You are right it has taken thousands of years to uncover the items we have found so far. This is with many many people looking. You are a bright person and my posts here are to point out how easy it is to step on another's ideas and beliefs. But I would like you consider that man's logic is not to be trusted.

Why? Should I trust what you say here or not? Besides, I do not believe Paul is saying all of human knowledge is wrong, he is more along the lines of using a bit of exaggeration to make a point that we shouldn't blindly believe whatever we are told, but should show some discernment in it. Either/orisms rarely show themselves to be accurate or logical as this example shows. We do not forsake our feelings for our knowledge and wisdom and we do not forsake our knowledge and wisdom for our feelings, rather, the two are needed and should all be part of our life and our faith.

[lilpixieofterror]

Yes when dealing with man's reasoning but no when dealing with the truth and the reasonable acceptance of it. The problem is many think that man has acquired truth in science and truth in logic. The verse says the natural man can not discern. I think that speaks for itself.

I do not believe that is at all what Paul is saying frank and to prove that, here is the entire context:

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for,

“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”

But we have the mind of Christ. " 1 Corth 2:10-16, NIV

I do not see Paul as saying, "Throw all knowledge out the window" rather he is saying, "Trust in God first." Pretty basic advice, but there's a difference between throwing all human knowledge out the window and saying that people that don't know God, do not understand God.

[franktalk]

I love canard, but as I explained to OC, Archeology actually confirms many cities and sites, as described in the Bible, as existing. What about the BOM? Why all the dodging and strawmen? Besides, Southern Cali was once covered in a forest much like you find in Montana back during the last ice age, but today it isn't and you know how much evidence is left over from that? Not very much. You do know that trees rot over time, right? You do know that only a small part of the evidence is preserved for future archeologist to discover, right? Really, how can you be so ignorant of facts like this?

So with such a small amount of evidence available why is it that science declares "facts" as you say? If new evidence is discovered tomorrow can it overturn what we think as fact and change our understanding? How can anyone declare what science says as truth? Truth is not some moving target. So if tomorrow a stone is found in an ancient city called Zarahemla you will convert? And the next week if someone says the stone is a fake you will leave the church? Do you blow in the wind based on stuff? How is that faith?