David Miller wrote:
> David Miller wrote: > > You guys, on the other hand, seem to think > > it is a sin to read the other side. > > DAVEH: > > I see you are not immune to telling me what I > > believe either, DavidM. Did you not read my > > post that explained that I have a few > > anti-Mormon books in my library? > > I don't remember you saying that you have read those books, only that you > have them in your library. Have you read any of them completely? DAVEH: I got most of the way through one of them. Others I have perused, but each time I try I find so many misrepresentations, errors and outright lies that I soon lose interest. Most are just regurgitation of tired old arguments that lack substance, IMO. I get the same stuff from Glenn, but at least he occasionally says a nice word or two about me! :-) > DAVEH: > > Do you have a specific question about it? Or > > do you just wish to use it to bash LDS theology > > or my beliefs? > > For starters, do you agree that these were the original documents which > Joseph Smith translated? DAVEH: No, I don't agree. From my understanding, they represent a (small) part of the original documents. > David Miller wrote: > > I think you misunderstand my intentions. > > DAVEH: > > LOL.......I don't think so, DavidM. But in > > case that I have.....what are they? > > To find out how you deal with the facts about the Book of Abraham, which > conclusively prove Joseph Smith lied about his ability to translate > Egyptian. DAVEH: As you know, I don't deal well with purported "facts" that I disagree with. > DAVEH: > > Ahhhhhhh.....In that case, I would be very interested > > in knowing if you believe our Heavenly Father currently > > has a body of flesh and bones? > > I believe that Jesus Christ has a body of flesh and bones, and I believe > that the Heavenly Father has a body, but not a body of flesh and bones. DAVEH: Thank you. I wonder why Glenn and other TTers are reluctant to weigh in on this. My fear is that you are the only Protestant that believes such. I'd sure like to hear some others comment on it. (And fellow TTers.....I am not trying to do this to cause dissension between you and DavidM.....I sincerely want to know what you believe and why.) > Dave Hansen wrote: > > Do you ever run into folks who have not > > read the Bible? If not, does that prevent > > you from discussing it with them? > > It prevents me from having any significant dialogue with them. Those who > have never read the Bible can only discuss it on the most superficial basis. > I always find myself asking them to read one of the books in the Bible first > so that serious dialogue about it can continue. If they refuse to read it, > then they lose all credibility with me. They have no basis for dismissing > the Bible if they have never read it. Sometimes when I preach at a > university and a student objects to the Bible as archaic and not worthy of > reading, I ask him questions to expose his knowledge of the Bible. When he > admits that he has not even read a whole book from the Bible, you can bet I > ridicule him before the hundreds of other students watching our exchange. I > shame him with ridicule because he deserves it, if he, on a university > campus, thinks he can get away with critiquing something that he has never > read. The students always agree with me on this point, whether they believe > in the Bible or not. DAVEH: Thanx for your comment. > David Miller wrote: > > It contains the entire Book of Abraham papyrus > > DAVEH: > > Really?!?!?!?! Are you sure, DavidM? If so, then > > I may change my mind. > > What I meant was that it contains the entire Book of Abraham papyrus that is > extant. DAVEH: Then it seems you were misleading other TTers, if not yourself/myself. Does Larson's book offer ANY Abraham text manuscripts? Or.....do the facsimiles depicted represent the only documents extant directly related to the BofA? > DAVEH: > > Are you accusing Blaine or me for not > > having love for our neighbors? > > Yes. DAVEH: If you are sincere about that, I'm sorry you feel that way, DavidM. If you are joking, or trying to evoke an angry emotion.....I am saddened by your ploy. > I am your neighbor, having conversed with you for many years over the > Internet. Have I EVER made such a request of you before? DAVEH: It does seem like you have wanted me to read anti-Mormon material before, but my memory is so bad I may be mistaking you for somebody else. Right now it is late and I don't have time to do a search. So, for the sake of argument, let's say you haven't. > Ever? DAVEH: With additional comments like that, I'm almost willing to stay up longer and do a search! :-) > As you > well know, years ago, I had a much different tenor to how I discussed this > subject with you. As my knowledge of Mormonism has grown, my opinions have > become more formulated. This is an important thing to me. You don't seem > to care. DAVEH: I've stated my reason for being in TT. You and others don't seem to be content with that. What I care about is not going to change the way you think or what you want to do. > DAVEH: > > OK DavidM, enough of your insinuating > > comments. Who have I offended? > > I told you in a past post that you have offended me by not caring to discuss > this Book of Abraham issue in detail. DAVEH: If you are not saying that to get my goat, then I am sorry you feel that way. I have not intended to offend you or anybody else in TT. And......I'll extend to you my apologies for disappointing you by not participating in my burning at the stake. If you are sincerely offended by my reticence in this matter, then it seems like you have a pretty thin skin for a street preacher, DavidM. Have you considered therapy?!?!?!? <VBG> > DaveH wrote: > > As for your comment that we "are motivated > > by evil spirits", I respectfully disagree. ... > > Anybody who wants to make disparaging > > comments about LDS theology will get little > > more than "I respectfully disagree" from me. > > My remark was meant to be taken seriously. What else explains this strange > avoidance behavior? DAVEH: I'd prefer to choose battles that I will enjoy. One of these days I will pick up a copy of Larson's book and read as much as I wish. If you (and I) still want to discuss it then, so be it. But at this point, that you are insistent to discuss it does not compel me to do the same. If you wish to argue against the LDS Church based on that book, there are other forums that may be more willing to accommodate you. But this TT Forum hardly seems the appropriate venue, and I am hardly the smartest LDS guy who is willing to do battle with you over it. > Hmmm. Don't you believe in evil spirits as real > entities??? DAVEH: Yes. And, I reckon you do to.....? > Joseph Smith sure believed in them. DAVEH: As do you, correct? > Peace be with you. > David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida USA -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
