1. Religion & Spirituality
Send to a Friend via Email

Discuss in my forum

Austin Cline

Case Against Mormonism

By September 17, 2004

Follow me on:

Mormonism is an original American religion that is becoming increasingly popular all over the world. Unlike most major religions, though, it relies heavily on the truth of archaeological and historical claims which can be reasonably checked against the fact - and the two don't entirely match.

Kyle J. Gerkin writes for the Secular Web:

Archaeological Fallacies: The BoM [Book of Mormon] makes mention of various technological products which were unknown to Mesoamerica. These include chariots (Alma 18:9) when there were no wheeled vehicles of any kind, steel swords (Ether 7:9) when there was neither steel nor swords, bellows for blacksmithing (1 Nephi 17:11), and silk (Alma 1:29). The BoM describes a vast civilization of millions who inhabited cities for hundreds of years, yet no ruins from even a single BoM city have ever been identified. No BoM place-names were in use when Europeans arrived in the New World.
Anthropological Fallacies: The culture described in the BoM conflicts radically with that of the actual inhabitants of Mesoamerica. The BoM peoples had a seven-day week (Mosiah 13:18), but no Mesoamerican calendar matches this. And Nephi, who came to the New World from Jerusalem, never bothers to contrast these strikingly different places. Most stunning of all, the BoM never once indicates that the American continent was anything but uninhabited when the refugees from Jerusalem arrived. Of course, there were actually millions of Native Americans occupying the land from one coast to the other.
Biological Fallacies: The BoM refers to a host of animals that did not exist in the pre-Columbian Americas or had been extinct in that region for thousands of years preceding the period described in the book. These include the ass, bull, calf, cattle, cow, domestic goat, horse, ox, domestic sheep, sow, swine and elephants. Several common animals that actually existed in Mesoamerica (deer, jaguars, tapir, monkeys, sloths, turkeys, llamas, alpacas, guinea pigs) are never mentioned. Also described are crops that didn't exist, such as wheat (Mosiah 9:9) and barley (Alma 11:7) Indeed, the agricultural techniques required to produce those crops didn't exist either. Once again, crops that were commonly known to Mesoamerica (chocolate, lima beans, squash, potatoes, tomatoes, manioc) are not referenced. Perhaps the gravest blunder of all is the BoM's assertion of a Hebraic origin for the American Indians. In Joseph's Smith's day, the now firmly-established Asiatic origin for Native Americans was known only in some scholarly circles.
Linguistic Fallacies: There are no examples of "reformed Egyptian" (the language Joseph claimed was written on the plates) in Mesoamerican history. And no Native American language is related to either ancient Egyptian or Hebrew, whereas a relationship does exist between Native American languages and Asian (Siberian) languages. Furthermore, no BoM proper names (Nephi, Laman, Zarahemla) appear in any of the many Mesoamerican writings that have been discovered. And speaking of proper names, Greek names such as Lachoneus, Timothy and Jonas appear in the BoM, but Nephi and his family left Jerusalem in 600 BC, long before Greek culture would have had any impact on the Hebrews.

As a point of criticism, I'm not sure that the label "fallacies" is appropriate here ó a fallacy is an error in the reasoning of an argument, not simply any error, lie, deception, etc. If I say "2 + 2 = 5," that's not a fallacy. That's just a mistake. The above seems to me to be more accurately labeled errors or mistakes, not fallacies.

Aside from that, however, it is a pretty nice summary of all the basic problems that exist for the claims upon which Mormonism today is founded. There is simply no getting around the fact that demonstrably untrue things are claimed ó and claimed in a work that supposedly came from God, even if written down by someone else. What, didn't God proof read the Gold Plates?

An additional point of interest occurs to me: if so many people could follow a religion that is so recent but with so many factual holes in it, how much easier would it be to follow a religion that would be much harder to fact-check, assuming that anyone was even inclined to do so in the first place? One of the claims made on behalf of Christianity is that the events upon which it was founded were so recent for so many people that they wouldn't have followed if the claims weren't true. After all, it would have been too easy to check. Here, however, we have an example of a religion making claims that can be checked, have been checked, and have been shown to be false ó and it doesn't change a thing. Why, then, expect Jews and Gentiles in the 1st century Roman Empire to be any more skeptical and doubtful?

Read More:

Comments
November 24, 2007 at 12:31 am
(1) franklin says:

i just wanted to thank you for getting the truth out to as many people as possible. I just recently became mormon I failed to investigate it’s history. When being taught the principles of this so-called religion they left out many important facts. Such as baptizing for the dead. Are they serious? I can’t believe that God would purposely damn any man for not knowing of Him. There are so many other doctrines that the Mormons hold fast to, to many to mention. Once again thanks for getting the word out that Mormons are just Christian fakes.

August 1, 2008 at 10:51 pm
(2) leonel mark says:

As a point of criticism, I’m not sure that the label “fallacies” is appropriate here ó a fallacy is an error in the reasoning of an argument, not simply any error, lie, deception, etc.

Meaning your point is Criticism?…and you are not sure of the label of Fallacy..Im not a member but I do not criticize the other religion…
do you feel envy? or you want to build a church and you are the Leader among the people?..The fact that you are making your own nonsense job!…or maybe you just want to be a popular so that you will have a high income. sssssshhhh
its not working …so change your lifestyle..my friend

August 1, 2008 at 11:28 pm
(3) Austin Cline says:

Meaning your point is Criticism?

No, I was simply raising a point of criticism of the material I was quoting.

do you feel envy?

No. Is there some reason you think I do?

or you want to build a church and you are the Leader among the people?

No. Is there some reason you think I do?

..The fact that you are making your own nonsense job!.

Sorry, I can’t make sense of that.

…so change your lifestyle..my friend

What do you think I should change, and why?:

September 22, 2008 at 5:02 am
(4) ex-mormon says:

Good job with exposing these facts! Sad to say, my husband and I became involved with this cult a few years ago. We left Church for a while, and with the recent goings on for President, Mitt Romney brought this back to the front burner. The arguments began. I had no clue how deeply brainwashed my husband was. I have no idea how to get him out of this mess. He insists “I’m wrong” and he is not appearing to want to listen to facts. If anyone could help me please feel free. It is ruining my life and my marriage… well, what’s left of it doesn’t look like it will last much longer.
Thanks!

October 24, 2008 at 2:20 pm
(5) Ahthur Ungnone says:

I’d love to know more about the argument against the historical accuracy of Christianity. I’ve never found it fully convincing, because, as you stated, people always believe whatever is convenient.

June 26, 2011 at 4:17 am
(6) former skeptic says:

Ahthur: I highly, highly recommend reading Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ.” He was a former skeptic, who decided to interview many renown New Testament scholars on the historical verity of the New Testament. He asked experts about the documentation of the canon, the eyewitness accounts, the medical evidence of Jesus’ suffering, and more. Despite his somewhat-cheesy use of court case imagery, I think anyone that wants to look at another side of this issue should read it!

May 27, 2009 at 9:31 pm
(7) Keith says:

Christianity is being proven daily. Look at the world around you. Everything is too intriquit to be just “evolved”. Look at the chariot reminants discovered in the Red Sea for instance. Gee, that is pretty amazing. Unfortunately, most “Christians” have put us in the hole because of their own personal ways of life… Sad to say, God loves everyone and wants a “personal” relationship with all of us. Not a religious mechanical robot. Ask God to make himself real in your life. Trust me, he will have no problem in doing so, you just need faith of a mustard seed…

April 11, 2011 at 3:35 pm
(8) seathanaich says:

“Christianity is being proven daily.”

“Wishful thinking” on your part does not constitute evidence to those of us who understand what evidence is.

May 11, 2011 at 6:08 am
(9) Jordan C. says:

and the logic/reasoning of a cabbage.

May 30, 2009 at 10:08 pm
(10) Mason Huemmer says:

Great job on showing the historical errors to mormonism. Unfortunately if you think youre arguement for not trusting the bible is a good arguement, you need to rethink that one. You’re trying to make the claim of saying the bible is not historically accurate, without showing a shed of evidence against the claims the bible makes. Your job is to show me the burden of proof. I would suggest reading books by Josh McDowell. I know youre an athiest, but ask yourself if you’re allowing the evidence to lead you in what you are to believe in. And I can guess your only looking at the arguements that are satisfying to your taste. Read “Reasonable Faith” by William Lane Craig and “I don’t have enough Faith to be an Athiest” by Norman Geisler. I believe the evidence is overwhelming. Listen to what Plato said, “the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light [truth].” Now go and Follow truth even if it means you lose and are afraid of what it might lead you to.

June 1, 2009 at 8:58 pm
(11) Darin says:

The burden of proof is never in the hands of the negative position. It is not an atheist’s duty to prove god doesn’t exist; it is the believer’s task, the reason being that an atheist isn’t making claims and assumptions that directly affect people’s lives. Living without belief in a particular deity currently has little political and social power. The moment that an idea has the power to affect society and personal decisions, evidence must be presented to validate the necessity of belief and devotion, else gullibility can bring harm and disappointment.
Not believing has fewer possible negative consequences, in my opinion.

October 5, 2009 at 9:36 pm
(12) Shot In The Dark says:

Here’s some evidence against the historicity of the bible: http://www.evilbible.com/
http://jesusneverexisted.com/
As for christianity being proven daily, are you actually looking around or just trying to wax poetic? Either way, you are absolutely wrong. And having faith, even as great as a mustard seeds, does nothing to manifest such an impossible situation. I can have all the faith (absence of evidence, complete conviction regardless) in unicorns, faeries and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but none of those things will manifest either. It’s time to revise bronze age thinking. Invest time into your own education. apathy will not bring positive results, no matter how great a degree of apathy employed.

July 25, 2011 at 12:02 pm
(13) Joey says:

you a sad puppy.

October 5, 2009 at 9:38 pm
(14) Shot In The Dark says:

Where did my comment go?

October 8, 2009 at 9:59 pm
(15) jeff says:

After a few 18-yr old “elders” knocked on my door, I decided to give the book of mormon a read. What struck me most was the claim of huge cities, full of millions of people, who warred against each ofther. The bad guys won, and god turned them dark, as they were impure. The claim is that the victors were the ancestors of native Americans. I too was struck by the absolute dearth of any archeological evidence to support these claims, as well as the outright racism suggested by the text. I cannot believe any rational thinking person would take this sh** seriously, of course they take limbaugh seriously, so it should’nt surpise me.

February 2, 2010 at 1:59 am
(16) teacher says:

I’ve studied this cult, after I was asked to join by one of my co-workers at Target, in san jo,ca. I investigated and found in the encyclopedia of religious knowledge that was published in 1894, stated that in 1826 new york vs. Joseph Smith Jr. Was found guilty for using seer stones, which is used by those who practice witchcraft.

November 28, 2010 at 10:26 pm
(17) Amelia says:

Why are you guys bashing some random religious cult that brings a few people happiness? Don’t you guys have more important things to do? Why not work on the other more important problems this world has? Like people starving in Africa and what not. So this group of people are doing some things wrong, but what group of people are not. eh… whatever ignore me, I’m just some uneducated 14 your old with questions. But my point is, the Mormons and there problems can wait….

November 29, 2010 at 5:56 am
(18) Austin Cline says:

Why are you guys bashing some random religious cult that brings a few people happiness?

1. Since when does criticism constitute “bashing”?

2. You do know, don’t you, that not every religion makes every adherent happy?

Don’t you guys have more important things to do?

Thinking about what is and is not true about the world is pretty important. Why doesn’t it interest you?

Why not work on the other more important problems this world has? Like people starving in Africa and what not.

And how many of those issues have no religious component?

But my point is, the Mormons and there problems can wait….

Except for the people who are harmed by Mormonism.

December 11, 2011 at 6:33 pm
(19) joe huren says:

Austin cline
When you said “You do know, donít you, that not every religion makes every adherent happy?”

you are right not EVERY religion makes every adheret happy so why are you just “BASHING” on this one christian faith if they want to follow it let them follow it i used to be a jehovah wittness but it didn’t make me happy so i coverted to a catholic

December 13, 2010 at 9:27 pm
(20) Jesus freak says:

Austin Cline :) couldnt have said that any better

March 4, 2011 at 4:05 am
(21) geo says:

I just wonder how much harm or destruction has this article done to the mormons? In my understanding very little as growing number of people are now joining this church. Satan is hateful of it because of the goodness that this church is bringing to the world and so he would use people from many walks of life to destroy it but can he succeed?
I do doubt about it. So please Satan do a lot more. Un-christ-like remarks and everything unchristian that you can do to blot it out.

March 4, 2011 at 4:13 am
(22) geo says:

so you are harmed by the mormons? No wonder!!
now we understand the reason for your anti mormoism.
yes it is natural for Satan people to counteract not like christ followers who when someone slaps them on one cheek they gave the other side to be slapped

March 11, 2011 at 8:47 pm
(23) Bob says:

That is the sort of outlook which saves you from having to think and offer any evidence for your beliefs. I think 50% of any population are educationally ignorant and don’t think. They are easily manipulated being the reserves for the Mormons, religious fundamentalists, astrologers and psychics etc.

Satan was invented to explain bad behaviour at a time when little was understood of human psychology.

Turning the other cheek sounds good so when the Japanese invaded Pearl Harbour why didn’t Americans just give them another harbour to bomb (equivalent of another cheek)?

March 11, 2011 at 4:01 pm
(24) houstonrahoyt says:

Amelia, on an Atheism site, wouldn’t you expect to read Atheistic arguments. And respectful discourse can only solve problems.

March 11, 2011 at 4:10 pm
(25) Brent says:

Ever wonder why Native Americans, even though they’re the villains of this even “newer testament,” are not adherents in large numbers? One would think they would be much closer historically to Mormonism than any other group.

March 12, 2011 at 9:28 am
(26) Todd says:

“so you are harmed by the mormons? No wonder!!’

Read it again. He didn’t say he was harmed by Mormons.

March 15, 2011 at 5:36 pm
(27) The Big Blue Frog says:

I can’t believe anyone is still seriously recommending that horrible book by Josh McDowell. It’s a pitiful attempt at apologetics. Not that any of the Christian apologists have a leg to stand on, but no legitimate theologist puts an address in the back of his books where you can send money to prop up his “ministry.”

July 7, 2011 at 6:04 pm
(28) Stan says:

Read Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ.”

July 7, 2011 at 7:49 pm
(29) Austin Cline says:

Read Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ.”

I have. It’s worthless and dishonest.

July 22, 2011 at 5:54 am
(30) Nellie says:

What bothers me is that so many other religions are constantlly “bashing” and protesting Mormons. They show up at our places of worship to try to disturb our teachings . Mormans seem to be the only religion that does not protest against other religions. If Your religion is right then focus on what you believe and not on what others believe, you don’t have to bash on and protest against us to try and make your religion look better. We don’t set out to hurt others we only want to believe what we believe so let us be. The constitution has freedom of religion for a reason.

October 23, 2011 at 3:53 am
(31) Jacob says:

No Book of Mormon place-names were in use when Europeans arrived in the New World:
Notoriously Europeans had a sense of jingoistic ethnocentrism that would have influenced the decision to have new lands named in an Anglocized manner. The names of old would seem foreign and inferior.

The existence of crops that didn’t exist, such as wheat (Mosiah 9:9) and barley (Alma 11:7):
Because plant transfers from one land to another often don’t succeed in the long run these references must have been to pre-existing grains. The error though most assuredly was in translation. ďBarleyĒ may be the name Joseph Smith attributed to the true grain that was used which could have been foxtail millet or Quinoa.

There are no examples of “reformed Egyptian” in Mesoamerican history:
Several modified or “reformed” Egyptian scripts are well known, including forms called Demotic and Hieratic. “Reformed Egyptian” is clearly an appropriate generic term for those writing systems. However, the “Reformed Egyptian” used by the Nephites is described as a language system unique to them (Mormon 9:32-34), having evolved with their culture over a 1,000-year period. It was apparently used for sacred writings, and should have been almost wholly lost with the destruction of Nephite civilization. How can we expect Egyptologists, with typically no training in Central American matters, to know whether such a language ever existed there?

October 23, 2011 at 3:54 am
(32) Jacob says:

The use of chariots (Alma 18:9) when there were no wheeled vehicles of any kind:
They had the idea, but there were no domesticated animals large enough to pull a cart. Llamas were the biggest. Also one must take in to account that no wooden object, such as a wheel or wagon, could whether the destruction of a kingdom and 2,000 years of exposure to the humid climate.

Steel swords (Ether 7:9) when there was neither steel nor swords:
Steel is mentioned only five times in the Book of Mormon, once in the Book of Ether (7.9), and four times in the Nephite records (1 Ne 4.9, 1 Ne 16.18, 2 Ne 5.15 and Jar 1.8). Of these, two refer to Near Eastern weapons of the early sixth century B.C. 1 Ne 4.9 states that the blade of Laban’s sword was “of most precious steel.” Nephi’s Near Eastern bow was “made of fine steel” (1 Ne 16.18). The next two references are to steel among generic metal lists.

The existence of silk (Alma 1:29):
Some LDS scholars have pointed to known materials from ancient Mesoamerica that could have been called silk but there is also evidence that the silkworm actually was known in the New World before the arrival of Columbus.

The existence of animals like the ass, bull, calf, cattle, cow, domestic goat, horse, ox, domestic sheep, sow, swine and elephants:
Many of these animals have similar biological counterparts in the Americas and others have fossilized proof that they lived at a time near the Book of Mormon in the Americas.

October 23, 2011 at 12:41 pm
(33) Austin Cline says:

Notoriously Europeans had a sense of jingoistic ethnocentrism that would have influenced the decision to have new lands named in an Anglocized manner.

Irrelevant; no place names from the Book of Mormon were in use when they arrived.

Because plant transfers from one land to another often don’t succeed in the long run

But they did, as demonstrated by their presence here today. But contrary to the Book of Mormon, they weren’t here prior to European colonization.

Several modified or “reformed” Egyptian scripts are well known

And none have been found in the Americas.

They had the idea, but there were no domesticated animals large enough to pull a cart.

Ergo, the claim of chariots being used was false.

Steel is mentioned only five times in the Book of Mormon

And each time is false, since the steel didn’t exist here.

Many of these animals have similar biological counterparts in the Americas

But none of them actually exist, contrary to the Book of Mormon.

January 6, 2012 at 7:53 pm
(34) john henry says:

Thank you, I thought your study well done as you were not, as most are, aruging form the point “my church is right and mormonism is wrong”

February 21, 2012 at 9:54 pm
(35) True Disciple says:

I converted to the LDS church as a youth more than 30 years ago. I served an LDS mission and have been active in the church since my baptism. However, I have always had problems with Joseph Smithís history and the many and varied problems with the Book of Mormon. I know the BOM is not what the church claims it to be, but I judge the LDS on its merits and how it brings Godís children to know Jesus Christ.

The LDS church has so many truths that are lost on the rest of Christianity: that God is an exalted human being, that the human race are His children on this Earth, that Jesus Christ is His Son and our elder brother, that the entire human race is a heavenly family that lived with God before this mortal existence, that we knew Jesus before this life and honored Him for the sacrifice he would make for us, that we are eternally bound to Jesus Christ (before this life, in this life and after this life), the nature of heaven and that a burning hell is not an eternal condition for any of Godís children, and many more beautiful doctrines that will bring us closer to God and Jesus than any other Christian church.

The LDS church has its problems, no doubt, but no church is perfect. I donít believe in the BOM, but the LDS church is so very much more than just that one book. If the day comes when the church can no longer stand by the BOM because of its problems, I will be here to help church members deal with that as I have dealt with it most of my life and itís OK.

February 22, 2012 at 3:24 pm
(36) Austin Cline says:

The LDS church has so many truths that are lost on the rest of Christianity

Can you demonstrate the validity of any of these alleged truths?

April 4, 2012 at 6:15 pm
(37) Sagitta says:

“The LDS church has so many truths that are lost on the rest of Christianity”

I doubt ‘True Disciple’ will ever be back since it has been 6 weeks already, but I am curious to know how the LDS church is “Christian” if they follow a different prophet other than Jesus Christ.

May 7, 2012 at 1:39 am
(38) kevin McKnelly says:

There were horses. Just discovered in Panama Canal in 2009. This is why I don”t put all my faith in science. Just when you think they have destroyed an argument, oops! I guess there were horses down there after all in South America.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090608125103.htm

May 7, 2012 at 10:06 am
(39) Austin Cline says:

There were horses. Just discovered in Panama Canal in 2009. This is why I dont put all my faith in science. Just when you think they have destroyed an argument, oops!

Those are ancestors of modern horses. They weren’t “just discovered,” scientists have known that the ancestors of horses existed in North and (probably) South America for quite a long time.

Oops.

I guess there were horses down there after all in South America.

Not modern horses, which the Book of Mormon claims. The horse family died out in this hemisphere around the same time as other megafauna.

June 4, 2012 at 1:46 pm
(40) Seeker of Truth says:

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading these comments. I can hardly believe i have read all of them. Austin……..thanks for studying the BOM and providing a commentary. I am certain you had expected the cords you struck to envoke the discussion that has followed.

I enjoy a good discussion where people listen and share as opposed to screaming while covering their ears :)

I do believe that credibility and the value of an opinion is lost when someone falls in a rut defending their position and fails to at least ponder another’s suggestion. Doesn’t it at least seem possible that if the ancestors of the modern horse were found to exist in the New World, then their descendents could have been here also? ( Not that this alone is a proof that the BOM is truth) I mean to be encouraging Austin. I do enjoy reading this discussion and hope it continues.

August 14, 2012 at 5:17 pm
(41) John Cunningham says:

before anyone wastes their money on a book by lee stobel read the case against lee strobel,
the fact that no item name or situation in the book of mormon exsisted during the time period also applies to the bible, there was no alhabet with the symbols to produce any of the names.
the fact that the books paper with a ph of 4.7 rather then7.4 is a host of molds, fungus and bacteria that is unfit for humans to touch should make those brain dead or brain washed lied to persons take notice thank you for the formate to set the story stright.

August 21, 2012 at 1:54 pm
(42) Jaime says:

Hi Sagitta! I know this response is more than a bit delayed, but I thought I might take advantage of the opportunity to step in for ‘True Disciple’ and provide some LDS perspective.

One of the most common misconceptions about Mormanism is that we are not Christian. However, ‘Christian’ is an umbrella term for those who worship Jesus Christ, and we do fall under that category. Conversely, we DO NOT worship Joseph Smith. We acknowledge him as a prophet and are grateful for what he did to restore the church of Jesus Christ to the earth.

Also, as an interesting side note: I have noticed that the Mormon church is often described as a cult. I recognize that when this happens, the term comes with the negative connotations and ignorance of the speaker, but to set the record straight for those who are not fortunate enough to have access to a dictionary, this is the definition of a ‘cult’: “An instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers.” This sounds to me like every religion ever. We happen to believe that ours is the only true religion, but who doesn’t?

August 31, 2012 at 4:33 pm
(43) SCOTT-ALLEN says:

I am a Christian, and definitely not a LDS/Mormon member. I am on this site so that I can learn and challenge my own beliefs as well as others. I believe that iron sharpens Iron and its important to understand what you believe and why you believe. Its also import to be able to defend your views if called upon.

One thing that strikes me as disrespectful from both sides is the assumption of happiness. I do not assume because people don’t believe in a GOD that they are unhappy, like wise I don’t believe that if you believe in a GOD that you will be given happiness. I have friends that are both Agnostic and Atheist and they are genuinely good people. I have seen some of the most atrocious acts done by Christians. I believe however that all humans are flawed and we all have an internal yearning for the truth.

The article above highlights some reasons why I could never be part of the Mormon Church, I respect the fact that he used data and confirmed facts to disprove this church and although some people may find loop holes…. it will be hard to dismiss all the above as simply misunderstandings.

I applaud the search for knowledge even if I dont agree with everyone’s view point on it.

September 7, 2012 at 8:06 pm
(44) Marvin says:

Jaime,

Almost all sects of Buddhism do not believe that their faith is the only one, the United Unitarian church has a similar opinion, and some Muslim, Christian, and I think Jewish philosophers have put forth the idea of multi-faceted paths towards paradise. I’m sure there are more, but those are just the ones that I know off of the top of my head.

January 6, 2013 at 6:20 pm
(45) Jim says:

The only important thing about any religion is whether or not it’s doctrines correspond to reality. Whether it is “true.” Atheism promises oblivion through the second law. Still, they manage a noteworthy condescension and contempt. In my investigations I have refuted all major religions using science. Mormonism is among them. Islam is among them. The Eastern models of cosmology are refuted by physics. Only the Judeo/Christian documents remain, but this is obscured a bit by English translations from the original languages, where big bang cosmology and the fossil record are accurately taught. The scientific ages are allowed in the original languages. As is a local flood, not a global one. A good source for information on these things is RTB.org. Browze a little. Ask yourself how so many Oxford, Yale, etc, professors are so easily fooled, but you are not (!?). Maybe skeptics are not as open minded as they often claim.
No matter how contemptuous you are of the idea of a Creator, you remain contingent and living in a contingent universe boxed in by event horizons. Don’t get too confident that an eternity is not at stake.

January 15, 2013 at 5:17 pm
(46) Marvin says:

(Another Marvin than in 44 above)

Jim:
My mother insisted that the first part of Genesis 1.2 took care of everything: “And the earth was without form, and void . . .” She believed that any number of “creations” could have existed before Adam and Eve. Is something like this what you mean by “big bang cosmology and the fossil record are accurately taught”? I can also imagine liberal interpretations on the order of those that claim Nostrodamus predicted the 9/11 attack, but are you suggesting something more substantive?

“Donít get too confident that an eternity is not at stake.”

In all seriousness I ask, huh?

July 23, 2013 at 12:13 am
(47) shortimer says:

I am always amazed at the tortuous arguments made by some of those above. Logically if any religion is right, there must be a supreme being. Jesus Christ’s divinity and truth is based on there being a God. Arguments about God all have an underlying difficulty in that they assume there is a God. If and when there is verifiable evidence of God, God’s existance is only a weak assumption. Likewise the divinity and importance of all the prophets, angels, Satan can no more be proved than the existance of God. Frankly, anyone who believes in a spiritual supreme being is deluded.

August 4, 2013 at 3:42 am
(48) Logicalphilosopher says:

You can believe whatever you want but don’t try to tell others it is true unless you have proof. Every religion is simply an attempt by people to understand their place in the universe or to manipulate people into following them for gain. There are innumerable historical errors and contradictions in the bible I won’t bother to state them because they are easily found elsewhere. The simple fact is that if a all-powerful being transmitted information to a human to record it would be exactly correct and available for all to see. (Just like the perfect replication of a song on a CD) You wouldn’t need to put magic rocks into your hat as Smith did to read it. What is the point?

August 4, 2013 at 3:43 am
(49) Logicalphilosopher says:

If an all-powerful being, knowing everything past present and future (and the inherent failings of humans) wanted to tell us critical information, it wouldn’t tell it secretly to one person. Pre-school kids know that happens when rumours pass from person to person… Finally an all powerful being knowing all would not have made mistakes in it’s information. Case in point: The ‘Virgin’ Mary was not a ‘virgin. Firstly parthenogenesis is impossible in humans, secondly as every scholar knows this was a mistranslation form the Hebrew to the Greek. Isiah says ‘young woman’ not virgin. Plus how would Yeshua’s brothers and sisters feel about that?

Further the Bible allows selling your children into slavery (but buying back only the males), genocide where all inhabitants of the country you are invading are murdered men women and children on god’s command, “Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” (1 Sam. 15:2-3)”. Nice going for a ‘loving’ god! Also there is fun stuff like men are allowed to have multiple wives, you can stone your sons to death for being drunkards, and “anyone who sees the face of god will die”. I could go on for pages. The simple fact is that if god were real, he would be hauled in front of the International War Crimes Tribunal. It seems that we feeble humans have better morals that this god… Funny huh? The day this ‘god’ turns up to address the UN I will believe in it. Until then, god is out along with Santa and the Easter bunny…

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.