News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

R2: Sexual selection is a well known characteristic of evolutionary theory. In this scheme mates are selected for based on secondary characteristics which are usually indicators of fitness.

Jeanie: Thanks Russell. I understand how it works....(Sexual selection). I think, with humans, its a matter of personal taste, more, though. (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder). My husband likes that I'm not "dark." (I know this isn't about me though : ) Boy, Bex made some good points, though. I work with special ed a lot and these kids are precious....

Hi Jeanie

Jeanie: I do not believe the Bible is false.

That wasn’t the question, if someone proved to you that it was false, really proved it to your satisfaction, how would that affect you. It’s a hypothetical question so let your imagination run wild if you can and tell us how that would affect your life.

So many of the things mentioned in the bible contradict real world evidence and the more fundamentalist the believer the less they seem willing to really get into the evidence and theory that science has come up with to explain the world around us. Do you think there may be a link between this avoidance and the contradictions you find everywhere between the findings of science and the words in the bible?

I think people are misinterpreting it....or don't have the big picture - the whole truth.

I’m sure of that though I would probably differ with you on who and why

Your statements about the order of the creation don't phase me. We have other scripture, as I've stated, which goes into the creation in more depth.

Sure but none of these passages have the order right, not even close.

I don't see how you can say the vitamin C issue is proof we are cousins to apes. Cool little factoid there, but proof????? NOT.

How then would you explain it? It’s more than a coincidence that of the 50000 or so bases that describe the vitamin C pathway just 3, and the exact same three, are altered in us and exactly the organisms that ToE suggests we are most closely related to. Of course it gets far more interesting if you look more deeply at our DNA. Errors, viral insertions, and many more details all produce a picture of who is more closely related to who that is hard to explain in any other way than ToE. As you start to find literally hundreds of these sorts of ‘cool little factoids’ you have to start asking why? How could this happen if god independently designed all of these creatures. Even in courts of law shared errors are considered rock solid proof of shared source. Such evidence is used in plagiarism cases regularly. Copy someone’s words and you may argue that that was the best way to describe something and you did so independently but copy their errors and you are in very deep trouble.

Kolob is so far away it can't be proven at this point.

It is? how do you know?

I don't claim the earth is 6000 years old and never have. I think materials here are made from eternal matter so, yes, could be billions and billions of years old.

Fair enough, I agree. But the dating methods that show so clearly that humans are older than 6000 years are not based on the age of the matter but on the last time it underwent some specific event that can be correlated with the life of those humans or the creatures being studied at the time. For really old samples radiometric dating is based on the time at which the rock cooled from molten form. For radio carbon dating it’s based on the time when the organism last breathed/transpired atmospheric air. A number of other methods are based on the last time a sample was exposed to sunlight. None of these methods are based on how old the matter is so they can’t be fooled by a recycled earth scenario.

Yet other methods are based on simple things like annual cycles (summer/winter, rainy/dry etc) such evidence can be observed forming today as we watch so we can understand in great detail how it works and so how old a given sample is. It’s often as simple as counting alternating coloured bands in wood, sediments or ice cores for example. Lots of different methods, none susceptible to being fooled by recycling all disagreeing with the words of the bible.

Of course we also know that the universe is expanding at a rapid rate so we know that it used to be much smaller once, in fact from that observation we understand that all of the matter here was created from energy when the universe was vary small and hot. Yes we can even look at the afterglow of this event to confirm the numbers that come out of that theory. The idea of eternal matter contradicts the evidence.

It doesn't affect my salvation one way or another as I stated.

But would it if you learned that the bible is wrong?

some things science will have to measure up to, not the other way around. Its all conjecture.

Now you are stepping onto dangerous ground. If you reject the possibility of knowing the truth by objective evidence how can you ever determine that it is not the Moslems who are right or the Hindu’s or Thor’s worshipers for that matter. Only objective evidence can really distinguish between these ideas yet you have reversed that essential link.

Leaving God out of the picture leaves some huge holes.

If god does not exist then it is the only logical way to deal with the world, to leave him out of our picture of it along with santa claus, the easter bunny, thor and all of the other false human ideas. If the ‘huge holes’ are the truth then surely we should face them and accept them.

And HOW can I prove we have a soul?

I suspect that you can’t. It’s very hard indeed to prove the existence of something that does not exist though many have tried.

YOU will find out we have souls when you die and you are still aware of everything going on.....and when you move beyond this realm. I'll see you there and we'll talk about it then some time in the future : )

LOL join the queue. It’s going to be a big crowed if you are right. The first was Pat, who I met on another forum years ago. She’s going to be waiting to meet me with a pink carnation in her hair so I’ll recognize her. It’ll be a great party so please come along.

Of course I suspect that what will actually happen is far less fun. Oblivion is not even boring but it’s certainly not going to be fun.

In reason

Russell

It's small wonder evolutionists have a strong aversion to common sense. Just a little common sense and common knowledge is all that's ever been needed to see through at least 75% of the bunk that makes up their argument-from-spam. Take away the obscure language and double-talk, and there goes the rest.

I liked this recent example of common knowledge + common sense.
I doubt evolutionism is going to be able to conjure up a plausible argument from transplants.

Well believe it or not, oblivion to some maybe the preferred choice, given some people's rejection of God or the idea of God and rejecting all ultimate accountability. See, no matter what you present before me, whose book says this or whose book says this and this person says the bible is false and this is their idea of proof and this new age guru has ALL the answers etc etc. Cannot do much to disprove the fruits of the bible and God's word that has so far, not failed regardless of time or the attacks but continues to live in men's hearts, showing itself in many fruits around the world.

Mans' word however is not so steadfast and is prone to failure time and time again. The bible is also a personal test, rather than simply believing in a "book". The words on the pages are inspired we believe by the Holy spirit and it is more than a mere "book" to us. How about the testing in ones own life? Does that not apply? How about miracles? Can you so easily explain them away when even doctors are often mystified? The impossible is done because nothing is impossible with God. There have been proofs with xrays, medical examinations/certificates etc. But that doesn't even compare with conversions and incredible changes of life. People cripped by drugs, criminal behaviours, abuse etc, trying everything and getting nowhere and finding God and being healed of their addiction or damage readily and completely, rather than suffering long term side effects and the continuation of cravings.

Tell me, can you explain to me the public miracle I was witness to in 1996 overseas as being "mass hallucination or delusion"? Since you were not there and I was, this is something no atheist will ever be able to remove from my life experience and defy my witness to God's control over nature. I can give you marks for trying though. Thousands saw it by the way, I guess one would have to try and explain all that away also. Or maybe insist I'm lying? Perhaps they were all drugged and me too without realising it? Or who knows? First time miracle for me and only time admittedly (in that area anyway), but not something one can ever erase from my mind and many others who saw it also.

See, I am well aware that no matter WHAT happens, there are people who will deny even on their deathbeds. They say "prove it" yet when any proof does occur from the supernatural pointing to God, they deny it. Even if it's been proven inexplicable. Why? Because they honestly didn't want to know in the first place. Instead they will go after any that have been proven false and point to those as being proof that there is no God, and ignore the genuine miracles. See if they had really done their research on the right side of the fence, they would not be so quick to ignore or deny (unless they are so against God, that they would lie rather than make any admissions).

But evenso, miracles do not have to be grand fireworks displays, there can be miracles of conversion, which really are far more important and actually the entire point of our lives. God isn't a show off, but there are times when He can and certainly has suspended the laws of nature (since He's outside of it). It is a shocking experience when you are a witness to it. Something that is mind blowing.

I have so much proof in my own life of God's existence, not just in the blatant miracle, but many other personal aspects, that you could come up with anybody's new age interpretation or swing, any gurus cry of "god is dead" OR "we are god" and it would fall completely flat in comparison.

Man's limitations, ego and denials and new age gurus and "answers" will oneday cease. However, in the meantime, they prevail, just as the bible told us would happen.

There is so much in history and to this day of the miraculous, that I personally think it's inexcusable that people play ignorance. I very much doubt they'll be able to use this excuse when finally facing their maker.

Questions for each person to ponder.

If a man told you his son was dying and that you could save him by sacrificing something you like to eat for the rest of your life, would you?

God laid a huge responsibility before us, but mankind—hating responsibility—attempts to escape it by denying the existence of the One who created the responsibility.

How arrogant and selfish it is for us to believe that we own our own bodies, seeing that we don't even understand how they work.

How blind of us to completely ignore the evidence and prophecy and gematria that One gave us through the Bible to show us what life is about and how to live it for the benefit of all.

We all fail, but He has provided a way overcome these failures, if we only believe, but we just keep pretending that none of this exists.

If someone came to you and said that a book was written by God that had predicted the future thousands of years in advance, is numerologically perfect, that it teaches us how to live for the benefit of all, and that it profoundly changed their life, would you read it?

Human arrogance is astounding.

"Humility is the hinge on the gate of knowledge."

I'm willing to take part in these questions (though I do not yet see the purpose in them) in hopes that you will in turn take part in the questions being asked of you.

In answer to the above question, it depends if there was actually any truth to the man's statement. How do I know beyond a reasonable doubt that his son will be saved by my abstaining from eating a certain food evermore (what will happen if I ever give in to my craving, years and years later, and eat that certain something)? If this isn't some sort of trick question and it really is as direct as you've worded, I believe I would do it if it were someone close to me or I felt compelled to help them.

That may sound harsh but remember people die every day. Here is a true and very current story. Three gypsy street urchins asked me (at different locations, not all at once) if I had any spare change while I was walking to work this morning, two of whom exhibited (possibly fake) debilitating ailments. I left a paltry amount of coins in the hands of the eldest one (who was the first one I passed, by happenstance). The next time they or others ask me the answer might be no. For all I know they need the money to buy vital medicine to stay alive. But, hey, I need to stay alive too. I can't go around helping the entire world out. How many poor, dying people are you helping on a daily basis? How many starving kittens in the street are you taking in (I've taken one in and I can't afford to take in any more (even though they're everywhere in my neighborhood))? Mother Nature is cruel only to be kind. If every dying person in Africa or India (or, Hell, America for that matter!) were saved from their doom, we as a species would overpopulate and suffer on an even larger scale.

In a perfect world though, sure, I'd abstain from a favourite food so some man's son (or nevermind it's they're son, so some man period) can live.



Someone meaning who? A man in orange robes with a shaven head and a sidelock asking me if I want to become a Hare Krishna? I'd probably say thank you but no thank you. A man on a street corner shouting how we are all sinners and the world is coming to an end? I'd probably keep on walking. A seemingly mystical being surrounded by a sphere of white glowing light? I think I just might decide to give it a read. You, Russ T., in mentioning your religious doctrine the holy bible? Well it depends on how you presented it to me but, sure, I might consider reading it (I have read some of it in fact). But that doesn't mean I believe it is what it claims to be. Even if the bible is proven to predict the future, how is that validation that God wrote it? Why could it not have been written by (your version of) Satan? You can't be for sure. You can only be certain that its predictions are accurate. If someone gives me a piece of paper which tells what will happen tomorrow written on it, and I then give it to you, will you believe that I wrote it just because I gave it to you and it came true?

Now for my question, as I have taken the time to answer yours.

What do you intend to do about the misused quote of yours regarding Darwin? Will you acknowledge the fault in its wording and either change it and/or stop using it?

Good. You answered the question, but do you see how you prefaced the answer with a corridor out. This is important to view because it's important that we know ourselves.

What does this say about you?



Not so.

The timing of Christ's return is coincident with population change so that no overpopulation would occur.

Of course, if you don't believe this, you would be compelled to let people die (look at your own logic), and if you don't believe this, it's simply because you don't want to know, and if you don't want to know, that means you shrug responsibility, and if you shrug responsibility, how can you honestly determine what you would do if required to make a sacrifice for someone else.

Have you taken the time to investigate God's Son (Christ) for the sake of the eternal salvation of your friends and family?

Know yourself.




This text is full of corridors out, but most importantly, your questions can all be answered by studying the Bible. I have done my homework and found Christ to be exactly what He claimed to be. That is my "testimony".

Now, will you use my delivery style as an excuse not to check it our for yourself, or will you humble yourself and see if I may know what I'm talking about?

Don't answer that to me. It's a question for you to ponder within yourself when things get bad enough to induce enough fear to cause you to become humble enough to seek truth.

So, in short, the answers are there if you want them. They question is, do you really want them?

Again we need to know ourselves.



What quote are you speaking about?

Hi Bex

Sorry about how long it took to get back to you on this one but life intrudes. I just got back from three days camping in the bush with my family exploring some really interesting country and some of the history of this area. Was a brilliant time, just magic, and great to spend some time with my family after being interstate working for so much of the last few months.

Yes the bible has shown its fruits around the world, it showed them in the crusades, in the witch trials, in the works of mother Teresa who was far more interested in saving souls than lives despite the fact that she had the resources to prolong and improve many lives. It has also shown itself in the good that christians do that is true but then people of most faiths or none do good, being a christian does not seem to produce people of greater goodness than many other faiths. Did you know that atheists represent just 0.2 percent of the US federal prison population and that they have a far lower divorce rate than Fundamentalist christians.

How about miracles? Can you so easily explain them away when even doctors are often mystified? There have been proofs with xrays, medical examinations/certificates etc.

I have heard these touted often but I’m yet to see a single, well documented, example. The human body can cure itself of well over 99% of the diseases and afflictions that attack it and there is much that medical science doesn’t know so is it any wonder that at times doctors get it wrong and predict that someone will die who doesn’t? Why are these ‘miracles’ never of the really obvious kind, why does an amputee never sprout a new limb? That would be a miracle worthy of god but cures of diseases which the body has long been known to be capable of curing on it’s own is hardly a miracle. Just because a doctor got it wrong when he predicted that someone would die doesn’t constitute a miracle. Did you know that we each develop around 3-5 insipient cancers per day but our bodies immune system easily deals with them. It’s only the rare exceptions that we are even aware off and it’s certainly not unknown that the immune system will kick in later and cure one that is more advanced. We don’t understand the mechanisms behind this in most cases though we are trying to work them out.

But that doesn't even compare with conversions and incredible changes of life. People cripped by drugs, criminal behaviours, abuse etc, trying everything and getting nowhere and finding God and being healed of their addiction or damage readily and completely, rather than suffering long term side effects and the continuation of cravings.

Of course many who did not find god experienced similar recoveries some with and some without modern medical help so what’s your point. Is god just one more treatment option? Is he better than placebo? What is his efficacy when tested against the best that modern medicine has to offer?

No I can’t even begin to explain your ‘public miracle’ as you have not told me anything about it.

The truth is that your standards of ‘proof’ fall far short of those accepted by scientifically minded people. Science is, above all other things, a method of avoiding self deception and delusion. We know that humans are subject to all sorts of misapprehensions. If you want to find the truth you have to rule out these things and that’s what science is about. That’s why the rigor. That’s why the repeat testing. That’s why all the detailed protocols.

Take conversion miracles for instance, if it is true that the god of the bible is the one true god how to you explain that all religions have similar conversion miracles, conversions to gods who do not exist. Isn’t it far more probable that conversions are a feature of religions not a feature of god’s; the truth or otherwise of the god they are converting to being irrelevant to the occurance. IN other words these conversion ‘miracles’ tell us more about the human mind and about believers and belief systems than about any claimed god.

I’ll skip comments on the preachy bits, not my cup of tea really.

All the best Bex

Russell

Hi Russ

If a man told you his son was dying and that you could save him by sacrificing something you like to eat for the rest of your life, would you?

If I had any reason to believe the man wasn’t just crazy sure I would, who wouldn’t. Given the total lack of connection between what I eat and the life of someone else’s dying son and the illogic of my having to sacrifice it even after he is cured I would have to see some good reason to believe it though.

God laid a huge responsibility before us, but mankind—hating responsibility—attempts to escape it by denying the existence of the One who created the responsibility.

Or maybe he never existed and humans who wanted to control us wrote a fairy tale describing what god want’s of us. Have you ever thought of that Russ? What if god never existed and it is all just a human invention? How would you ever know?

How arrogant and selfish it is for us to believe that we own our own bodies, seeing that we don't even understand how they work.

I don’t understand much of how my computer works but I know that I own it. What has understanding got to do with ownership? How many people actually understand, in full detail, how their cars work, or their TV’s, or even their alarm clocks?

How blind of us to completely ignore the evidence and prophecy and gematria that One gave us through the Bible to show us what life is about and how to live it for the benefit of all.

There is evidence of prophecy in the bible? Real evidence not post hoc claims fulfilled in the very same book? I’d like to see that.

We all fail, but He has provided a way overcome these failures, if we only believe, but we just keep pretending that none of this exists.

If you believe the book he created the system under which two humans failed then, despite the illogic and unfairness of it, he punished all of us for the failures of these two people who died so long before we were even conceived. And his salvation, his scheme, the only way he’ll accept us again involves us killing his son for him!! If a human father asked the same of you would you think highly of him?

Show me where the bible predicts the future, not just prophecies fulfilled in the same book that made them but real, detailed prophecies fulfilled outside the bible. Can you do it?

What does numerologically perfect mean?

If I pointed out that there are books that describe how to live for the benefit of all mankind, that are written by men and which do not contain the illogic, barbarity, unfairness, brutality, cruelty etc that the bible attributes directly to god which book should we prefer? If I further pointed out that these books did not contain the contradictions to evidence and logic that the bible does which should any rational person choose?

In Reason

Russell

Hi Russ

Of course, if you don't believe this, you would be compelled to let people die (look at your own logic)

There are other alternatives to all that suffering of course though I notice that most christian churches speak strongly against them; contraception and education could also alleviate these problems. There is more than enough food produced today to feed everyone on this planet. This can’t be sustained if our population continues to grow but we can control that as I have said. Why would we choose to rush towards a population level that would condemn so many to suffering and death on the hope that an ancient book, which is full of really obvious flaws, is right in predicting that ‘christ will return to save us’. Why would we choose to race full steam ahead towards a roadblock that would kill so many, when we have the brake in our hand, on the vague hope that an ancient belief system that has no concept of the limits of this planet and no conception of what we would be capable of might be true. Why should we limit ourselves to such irrational ideas when we can solve these problems ourselves if we only put our minds and our efforts to it? If we solve these problems and Christ does return what have we lost? If we don’t solve these problems and Christ does not return what have we lost? Which is the more rational approach Russ? It’s really scary to realize that some of the most powerful people on this planet actually believe this sort of thing. That they are happy to send us down such an obvious path to destruction, suffering and death on the vague hope that the bible is right when we have alternatives that we know can work.

If jesus does not return to save us it is you who would be condemning these people to suffering and death when we had the power to avert or at least minimize this disaster.

Have you taken the time to investigate God's Son (Christ) for the sake of the eternal salvation of your friends and family?

LOL I was a christian by my own choice once then I investigated it and realized my error.

What quote are you speaking about?


That one! I called you on it when I first saw you use it some time ago but you did not respond and even reposted it in a later discussion. Like a few of your quote mined items this is a false quote. One quick read should make that clear. How much could Darwin have known of Molecular biology for instance as this field was not invented till after his death. I looked the quote up and found that it was a direct citation from Gillespie’s book but with Darwin’s words removed and only his attribution left. Darwin never said these words yet you keep posting them as if he did. N.C. Gillespie said these words. Darwin never believed this or anything like it and it is very dishonest to repeatedly claim that he did.

In Reason

Russell

Russ: If someone came to you and said that a book was written by God that had predicted the future thousands of years in advance, is numerologically perfect, that it teaches us how to live for the benefit of all, and that it profoundly changed their life, would you read it?

Human arrogance is astounding.

Jeanie: Russ, although I know dates, etc. can be significant, I do not "get" what numerology even is or what it proves. Care to expound? I am pretty open to all kinds of "ologys" but this one is just not significant to me. ????

R2: There is more than enough food produced today to feed everyone on this planet

Jeanie: I agree. Actually if we all dedicated ourselves to our own gardens and to making sure we had enough food and storing it, rather than just being so profit oriented - and I'm not really all that green or at least not on the band wagon that way, although have always been pretty much a naturalist and actually do live green (yet don't do things because they are trendy.....only because I believe in it) I think we would have enough even with growing populations. I long for the lost days of simplicity sometimes....

What?

R2: If you believe the book he created the system under which two humans failed then, despite the illogic and unfairness of it, he punished all of us for the failures of these two people who died so long before we were even conceived. And his salvation, his scheme, the only way he’ll accept us again involves us killing his son for him!! If a human father asked the same of you would you think highly of him?

Jeanie: I just covered this on another post, but Adam is misunderstood. We have 13 Articles of Faith. The 2nd one states:

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

R2: And his salvation, his scheme, the only way he’ll accept us again involves us killing his son for him!! If a human father asked the same of you would you think highly of him?

Jeanie: Stated that way, I see your point. But its not how it was.... But neither is he going to throw us into a vat of fire, either. (Literally). I'm kind of curious what has made you so bitter toward God.

Hi Jeanie

I can relate to that. We’ve got some fruit trees at our place, a veggie patch that’s very productive, grape vines and chooks. It’s too small to feed us completely but it’s nice to have fresh and it’s hard to beat the eggs from happy chooks. In a few years we plan on buying a few acres of land so we can expand our orchard and veggie patch. I don’t think we need more than the two chooks unless we want to start selling the eggs though.

Still if we look at the big picture the earth could not sustain even the current population without scientific / mechanized agriculture. The potential productivity falls short without these aids but we have them, we are quite clever at growing food, so we can and do produce enough for everyone right now. The problem is unequal distribution not lack of quantity. And of course global populations can’t continue to grow as they are or this is unsustainable but we have solutions for that too if we put our minds to it.

Russell

Hi Jeanie

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

Yes I understand that, the bible even states it clearly but it shows by gods actions that this is not the case and it also states that god will visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. Exodus 20:5

Like so much in the bible you can find passages to support almost any view.

Jeanie: Stated that way, I see your point.

I’m relieved to hear that.

But its not how it was.... But neither is he going to throw us into a vat of fire, either. (Literally).

I guess that is open to interpretation though I think you'll find that my view is indeed the gist of the story if your boil it right down. I for one agree, I don’t believe he’ll throw me in a vat of fire any more than santa is going to give me coal this year if I’m naughty.

I'm kind of curious what has made you so bitter toward God.

LOL I’m no more bitter towards your god than I am towards Thor or Zeus or Santa Claus. It’s hard to be bitter towards the non existent IMHO. I just don’t get how people can be comfortable following a book that describes such an abhorrent and immoral view of the world as the bible describes. It intrigues me and worries me when such people hold great power. Look at the potential human disaster that awaits us if world leaders believe as Russ T does that we don’t have to worry about overpopulation because god will save us in time. Just imagine this world in 100 years time if our leaders act on that and they are wrong!!! That’s really scary especially when I see very good reason to suspect that they are wrong.

In reason

Russell

R2: Hi Jeanie

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

Yes I understand that, the bible even states it clearly but it shows by gods actions that this is not the case and it also states that god will visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. Exodus 20:5

Jeanie:

My dad came from a good family, overall, but my grandfather was apparently abusive to my grandmother. They both died when my dad was only 11. Daddy ended up going to war in Korea and had a drinking problem. He was a good man, but because of his issues, my brother, who swore angrily at my dad that he would never drink, (not long before my dad suddently died at only 38) became an alcoholic himself later on. He then had a son who's mother he never married. Their relationship didn't work mainly because they drank together. (She had also been molested and was rather promiscuous as a result so he couldn't trust her - but he loved her). Their son grew up not really having a present father or normal family. Then when my nephew was only 17 he fathered a son by an older woman. They have not married. My nephew has also had some issues with drugs but is, hopefully, making changes although has already made some very bad decisions. I wonder how his son will turn out? The sins of the fathers.... It is a natural consequence....(most of the time - some make an effort not to let it be) - not what God makes happen or does to punish others. Just an example but one that is near and dear to my heart and loved ones.... This same brother passed away last year at the age of 48. He had abused his body and died due to emphysema which also caused an enlarged heart and congestive heart failure. Very very sad. I loved him dearly. He was my big brother.

R2: Like so much in the bible you can find passages to support almost any view.

Jeanie: True - but perhaps not accurately.

R2: I just don’t get how people can be comfortable following a book that describes such an abhorrent and immoral view of the world as the bible describes.

Jeanie: Not following??????????????? I guess cause I don't see things the way you do as I've stated.

It intrigues me and worries me when such people hold great power. Look at the potential human disaster that awaits us if world leaders believe as Russ T does that we don’t have to worry about overpopulation because god will save us in time. Just imagine this world in 100 years time if our leaders act on that and they are wrong!!! That’s really scary especially when I see very good reason to suspect that they are wrong.

Jeanie: But we are the ones who have actually destroyed our own earth. I'm not saying we shouldn't take action on a lot of issues, but the implications of population control scare me!

R2: Hi Jeanie

I can relate to that. We’ve got some fruit trees at our place, a veggie patch that’s very productive, grape vines and chooks. It’s too small to feed us completely but it’s nice to have fresh and it’s hard to beat the eggs from happy chooks. In a few years we plan on buying a few acres of land so we can expand our orchard and veggie patch. I don’t think we need more than the two chooks unless we want to start selling the eggs though.

Jeanie: With the economic trends, etc., it'd probably help us all to eat this way, plus its healthier. We have 2 acres and I want to put some trees on and garden. We are waiting to find out if we are going to be able to stay here and retire, though, now. My dream has always been to be able to be somewhat self sustaining. I forget you're over in Australia.

R2: Still if we look at the big picture the earth could not sustain even the current population without scientific / mechanized agriculture. The potential productivity falls short without these aids but we have them, we are quite clever at growing food, so we can and do produce enough for everyone right now. The problem is unequal distribution not lack of quantity. And of course global populations can’t continue to grow as they are or this is unsustainable but we have solutions for that too if we put our minds to it.

Jeanie: Yes, we could make it work.

_________________________

Hi Jeanie

Jeanie: Not following??????????????? I guess cause I don't see things the way you do as I've stated.

That’s probably it. It always feels to me that bible believers only believe bits and pieces. They accept that it’s good to ‘do unto others’ and the like but they don’t think it’s a good idea to stone disobedient children to death at the city gates or sacrifice your virgin daughter as payment for a battle victory yet the bible also contains these ideas. It’s those other messages in the bible, and the bible’s full of them, the ignored messages that I have a problem with and I can’t see how anyone can be comfortable with a book that propagates such horrible, crewel and immoral ideas even if it also has some really good, intelligent, moral ideas in it too. Why not look for a book that leaves out the bad stuff? A book you don’t have to be so selective and apologetic about all the time. And how about looking for a moral guide that is aware of what our world is like today and not 2000+ years out of date?

But we are the ones who have actually destroyed our own earth. I'm not saying we shouldn't take action on a lot of issues, but the implications of population control scare me!

It’s true we are the architects of our own problems though much of that was innocent lack of knowledge and an attitude that said it’s all for us to do with as we will. Where did that idea come from again? But we have the power to solve these problems, maybe not overnight and not painlessly but we can do it if we put our minds to it. But we have road blocks in the forms of great world leaders who are short sighted or who believe that we don’t have to worry about the future of this planet. These people hold great power and they don’t care to try to solve these problems either due to their ideologies or simply for political expediency. Either is a very dangerous approach to dealing with our problems on this planet.

I’m far more scared of the implications of not controlling our population. If we do we risk inequity and a range of other problems that we can probably deal with, if we don’t we face a humanitarian disaster of monumental proportions that we simply can’t deal with. One way leads us to a path fraught with dangers we will have to work hard to resolve the other leads us to dangers we simply can’t solve no matter how hard we try. Which should we chose? It is a case of the lesser of two evils and population control is, IMHO the lesser.

LOL yes I’m an Aussie. How do you spell that so it sounds the way we pronounce it? I’ve never heard an American who can pronounce it correctly. We pronounce it more like ‘Ozzie’ and you seem to pronounce it more like ‘Assie’. Or maybe that’s just me listening to you guy’s through my own accent which actually leans far more towards Pommy than the ‘real’ Aussie twang.

In reason

Russell

R2: Jeanie: Not following??????????????? I guess cause I don't see things the way you do as I've stated.

That’s probably it. It always feels to me that bible believers only believe bits and pieces. They accept that it’s good to ‘do unto others’ and the like but they don’t think it’s a good idea to stone disobedient children to death at the city gates or sacrifice your virgin daughter as payment for a battle victory yet the bible also contains these ideas. It’s those other messages in the bible, and the bible’s full of them, the ignored messages that I have a problem with and I can’t see how anyone can be comfortable with a book that propagates such horrible, crewel and immoral ideas even if it also has some really good, intelligent, moral ideas in it too. Why not look for a book that leaves out the bad stuff? A book you don’t have to be so selective and apologetic about all the time. And how about looking for a moral guide that is aware of what our world is like today and not 2000+ years out of date?


Jeanie: Well, it just so happens..... I think you would find the Book of Mormon quite different. For one thing, it was written specifically for our day even though written back in the same time as the Bible. It contains the same Gospel, but has only been translated once and has the "plainness of the Gospel" which explains or puts things in clearer easier to understand writing. It also clarifies the Bible. If you go to www.mormon.org you can order a free one. It's possible missionaries will deliver it, but you don't have to get that involved if you don't want, but they may be able to answer some of your questions. The key is to read it and pray about it with an open heart whether it be true. Anyway, you should order one. Nothing to lose. And I'll make you a deal...I'll read something of yours if you read mine : )

How would you propose we deal with population control?

I'm trying to picture you talking...I like the accents. Is Ozzy Osborne from there??

Hi Jeanie

Maybe we’d better just settle for agreeing to disagree. I don’t want to upset anyone. If you don’t want to read my thoughts on the book of Mormon please just skip to the next post Jeanie.

Before you go Ozzy Osborne is British despite the name.

Now on to the book of Mormon.

I have read some of the book of Mormon, it’s available on line from the LDS website, and it reads to me much as the bible does. It quotes from books that were written long after it is claimed that it’s original was penned (Chiselled or however you mark gold plates), it is claimed that it was written in reformed Egyptian which is an unlikely language for an Israelite living around 600BCE, it talks of a steel bow long before the technology existed to make such implements, it describes a journey of 250 miles completed on foot in just three days by Nephi and his whole family , Nephi instructs his followers to work in Iron, copper, brass, steel, sliver and gold while the technology to do so was unknown to the Isrelites of 600BCE. It goes on to talk of cockatrice’s, dragons, satyrs, fiery flying serpents and that’s just in the first two chapters. Somewhere in there you lost me. I’m sorry but I find it hard to take such a work seriously and it certainly does not come across as a book for our time. In short it contains many of the same sorts of errors and problems that convinced me that the bible was fiction.

If you wish to follow up any of the info I have posted it’s up to you. That I’ve already read some of the book of Mormon probably shouldn’t count as I did it before you suggested the offer, but it’s up to you.

All the best Jeanie

Russell

I'm not offended Russell. But thanks for being sensitive enough to worry about it!

I can't believe it took me this long to figure out how to use the quote box! To be honest, it has been a while since I've read the BofM in its entirety, but now you have me curious. However, the first book written is more like the set up which tells the story of Lehi's family leaving Jersalem. Honestly, though, some of your criticisms are a little bold considering you weren't there as far as the language they used (its reformed because over time it was not in its pure form since this group separated from the original). Ever watched The Passion of the Christ? I hadn't ever really heard what that language sounded like and it was rather astonishing to me how similar it sounded to the Native American language. (Hebrew?? Whatever Mel had them speaking. Not sure how that relates to Reformed Eguptian or how that works, but just the same....) Of course the Indian or Lamanite/Nephite languages changed within tribes, too. (I have some Cherokee blood). You are going to find nit picky things about anything. But its pretty apparent that Joseph Smith himself didn't write it. Its a legitimate record. And it speaks of a people we didn't even know about till long after it was found. (People didn't know about the ruins in SA, certainly Joseph Smith did not! He was a barely educated, poor boy. You would have to read more to really get anything out of it, certainly beyond 1st Nephi. My favorite book is 3rd Nephi where Jesus came to America. Have you not heard of the legend of the Great White God? (Quetzecoatal) (sp?) I knew a family in Alaska who were descendents from way back who's grandparents knew of that "legend" and recognized the story when they heard about the Book of Mormon. Being part India, I have always loved Indians and their culture. I feel it in my blood. Maybe that is harder to understand if you can't relate. But anyway, it teaches Gospel principles in a plainer way. For instance, it talks about eternal burning but goes to explain it (and that it is not literal fire but symbolic). The whole reason I even looked into Mormonism was because of the whole "hell" issue. Just didn't ring true to me. Not the way I was being taught it. I have a concept of God being a loving Father and couldn't buy the way he was being represented. As far as the tools, etc., IMO people were a lot more advanced at times than we may have any idea. A written history, to me, is a lot more impressive than things that people have to dig up. On the other hand, there are lots of evidences that verify what the BofM talks about. However, as with the Bible, you do have to pray about whether its true or not and someone who doesn't even believe in God is not likely to do that at this point at least.. I appreciate you even entertaining the idea, though. Check out Third Nephi, sometime...

I forgot I even asked you that question about Ozzy. (Don't know why I did???) My husband has a friend who played bass for him. Talk about a character. (Ozzy) The guys that know my husband compare me and my husband a bit with Ozzy and Sharon : ) (My husband has made some SERIOUS changes in his life for me : ) And for himself, of course. (But with my help).

Hi Jeanie

LOL I’ve been doing manual quotes but I still don’t know how to use the Quote button controls on the site. I guess I just learned what I needed and haven’t gotten around to the rest.

To be honest, it has been a while since I've read the BofM in its entirety, but now you have me curious.

Me too though I read through a bit of it again yesterday when I was drafting my reply to you.

Honestly, though, some of your criticisms are a little bold considering you weren't there as far as the language they used (its reformed because over time it was not in its pure form since this group separated from the original).

Reformed, well later versions, of languagers are pretty normal, all languages evolve over time. There is no evidence anywhere that reformed Egyptian was a language known to the Israelites. That’s not to say that some didn’t but it’s an improbable language given that it was very very uncommon among them at least it is in all the writings we have from them from that period but Nephi claimed that it was the language of his father not just a rare languge that he happened to know. It’s not proof of anything but it is very suspicious.

And you are right, I wasn’t there, but then I’ve never been to America either but there’s plenty of evidence I can use to work out what America is like just as there’s lots of evidence that I can use to learn about the Israelites of 600BCE. Do I need to go to America to know about it?

It’s still hard to explain that Nephi quotes in around 590 BCE from a book that was not written till almost 200 years later. Malachi was written around 420 BCE.

Ever watched The Passion of the Christ?

No I managed to avoid it after reading a few reviews of it.

You are going to find nit picky things about anything. But its pretty apparent that Joseph Smith himself didn't write it. Its a legitimate record.

Now there’s a claim I’d like to see you support. What, to you, proves that Joseph Smith didn’t write it and that it is a legitimate record?

And it speaks of a people we didn't even know about till long after it was found. (People didn't know about the ruins in SA, certainly Joseph Smith did not! He was a barely educated, poor boy.

Can you cite chapter and verse on this and I’ll have a look at it.

The whole reason I even looked into Mormonism was because of the whole "hell" issue. Just didn't ring true to me. Not the way I was being taught it. I have a concept of God being a loving Father and couldn't buy the way he was being represented.

I had similar problems with the bible when I was a believer. LOL I guess I just took things a bit further than you did when I decided to look elsewhere for answers.

As far as the tools, etc., IMO people were a lot more advanced at times than we may have any idea. A written history, to me, is a lot more impressive than things that people have to dig up.

It may be though given the number of artefacts from that time that we have it seems very improbable but we certainly can’t rule it out. We can, however, say that we have no evidence to support the notion. It’s easy to imagine that an uneducated poor boy would get some of the details wrong and have tools and technology that were beyond the abilities of the people he was portraying in his story. That is certainly more plausible than the idea that god left gold magical gold plates in a backyard in Palmira New York to be found years later by Joseph IMHO. At least the idea that Joseph Smith made it up doesn’t break any major laws of physics and we know that people lie and deceive and are deluded or crazy at times.

On the other hand, there are lots of evidences that verify what the BofM talks about. However, as with the Bible, you do have to pray about whether its true or not and someone who doesn't even believe in God is not likely to do that at this point at least.

If there is evidence then prayer is not needed, show me the evidence. I’m open to evidence, good evidence, that’s what I base my ‘beliefs’ on. But you’re right, I’m not about to start praying about it any time soon. I gave that up long ago.

LOL did you know that Joseph Smith also appears to quote Shakespeare in 2 Nephi 1:14. "From whence no traveller can return" is a line from Hamlet. Coincidence maybe.

I appreciate you even entertaining the idea, though. Check out Third Nephi, sometime...

I’ll have a look when I get time. I seem to remember that it too had a few historical problems but I don’t remember the details.

All the best Jeanie

Russell

Try using the reply button instead of the quick reply window

LOL yeah I know where they are but I use Word to write these things so you won't know how bad my typing is!! So I have to work out how to use these functions manually. Besides I don't need very many of them.

So make a template with lots of quote callouts

R2:

Reformed, well later versions, of languagers are pretty normal, all languages evolve over time. There is no evidence anywhere that reformed Egyptian was a language known to the Israelites. That’s not to say that some didn’t but it’s an improbable language given that it was very very uncommon among them at least it is in all the writings we have from them from that period but Nephi claimed that it was the language of his father not just a rare languge that he happened to know. It’s not proof of anything but it is very suspicious.

Jeanie: Two references that explain the reason..... nothing suspicious to me.

Mosiah 1: 4
4 For it were not possible that our father, Lehi, could have remembered all these things, to have taught them to his children, except it were for the help of these plates; for he having been taught in the language of the Egyptians therefore he could read these engravings, and teach them to his children, that thereby they could teach them to their children, and so fulfilling the commandments of God, even down to this present time.

Morm. 9: 32
32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.


R2: It’s still hard to explain that Nephi quotes in around 590 BCE from a book that was not written till almost 200 years later. Malachi was written around 420 BCE.

Jeanie: The only scripture I'm aware of them quoting is from Isaiah.....

Ever watched The Passion of the Christ?

No I managed to avoid it after reading a few reviews of it.

Jeanie: It IS hard to watch....but worth seeing. Although I do believe the main suffering actually came from the Garden of Gethsemane where he bled from every pore. Mel portrays it like Jesus is scared and that is why he's sweating the blood, but he's sweating because of a rare medical condition which can be brought on by horrific stress. I'd say Jesus literally taking on the sins of every person who had, or would or will live which includes the sorrow and pain that goes along with sin was more than we mere humans could have done...Then he pretty much gives his life as a sacrifice for that sin so that the demands of justice could be made along with the demands of mercy.

You are going to find nit picky things about anything. But its pretty apparent that Joseph Smith himself didn't write it. Its a legitimate record.


Now there’s a claim I’d like to see you support. What, to you, proves that Joseph Smith didn’t write it and that it is a legitimate record?

Jeanie: It rings true to me when I read it. Even Joseph Smith mentions in his testimony of it that if there are mistakes they are from the foibles of men (my words). We have witnesses who handled and touched the plates. I believe its a true record of the peoples who were here in the Americas who came over from Jersalem just like it says. I feel the spirit when I read it. It clarifies doctrines in the Bible which are confusin or in need of better interpretation. And it is "another testament of Jesus the Christ." I HAVE prayed about it to know if it is true. I've heard people say (religious people) that you can't trust that...(yet they do with regards to other things). Maybe some people, though, don't even know how to pray and know and recognize hearing and feeling the spirit when they do? Honestly, with all due respect (and I do have a lot of respect for most of the Christians on here) the churches just don't have the full picture or the "fullness of " the Gospel. We have so much more guidance in every facet of our lives. The church is guided by revelation and inspired leaders. Heck, I was inspired myself just today. I felt an urgency to find some gas and called around learning that one Shell station was open. I headed out to also deposit a check and before I got there I found a cheaper, closer one which actually had Premium which we need for our mercedes. I got there - waited a bit and then once I filled up with premium, they literally ran out. I got the last of the premium. Then I called my daughter and had her bring the pacifica. She came a bit later and said they said they only had about 200 gallons left. I came out of Kroger where not a car was there. They were out of gas that quick. I was inspired to go down there when I did!

And it speaks of a people we didn't even know about till long after it was found. (People didn't know about the ruins in SA, certainly Joseph Smith did not! He was a barely educated, poor boy.

Can you cite chapter and verse on this and I’ll have a look at it.

Jeanie: It wasn't from the Book of Mormon (chapter and verse). Just referring to the ruins....probably stated poorly. (I'm sure you know something about that you'll refute... : ) Here, I;ll refute myself. Actually when I referred to people we didn't know of, its more civilizatoins...like ancient ones. Discovered in Peru, The Mayas, Aztecs.

The whole reason I even looked into Mormonism was because of the whole "hell" issue. Just didn't ring true to me. Not the way I was being taught it. I have a concept of God being a loving Father and couldn't buy the way he was being represented.

I had similar problems with the bible when I was a believer. LOL I guess I just took things a bit further than you did when I decided to look elsewhere for answers.

Jeanie: Well, I was about to give up on organized religion when I met an LDS girl I became friends with....

As far as the tools, etc., IMO people were a lot more advanced at times than we may have any idea. A written history, to me, is a lot more impressive than things that people have to dig up.

It may be though given the number of artefacts from that time that we have it seems very improbable but we certainly can’t rule it out. We can, however, say that we have no evidence to support the notion. It’s easy to imagine that an uneducated poor boy would get some of the details wrong and have tools and technology that were beyond the abilities of the people he was portraying in his story. That is certainly more plausible than the idea that god left gold magical gold plates in a backyard in Palmira New York to be found years later by Joseph IMHO. At least the idea that Joseph Smith made it up doesn’t break any major laws of physics and we know that people lie and deceive and are deluded or crazy at times.

Jeanie: To be honest, when I first learned about Joseph Smith I was irritated that they thought so highly of him (now I understand why and that he is NOT placed above Jesus Christ) but, at the time, I thought he was "ok" because I related with him. I was only 15 when I found the church. I was a deep kid.... I really did look into it. We didn't have the internet, (which is great, but there is also a lot of bogus information out there, too) but I'd read the Bible and was trying to figure out why there were so many different interpretations of the Bible - and which was right. My evangelist Uncle gave me a Scofield Bible for my birthday (14th I think) and I got things out of it, but it still didn't ring true. My Uncle was pretty judgmental, too. Told me something about how God would destroy my temple if I defiled it. He was rough on his son, my cousin, too. He died quite mad at me because I joined the church. I tried several different denominations and something was missing. I needed guidance...didn't have much from home (none, actually) and did settle for a while on my sister's church that she went to with her husband. This one taught some pretty rediculous things about hell. And when I asked a man there about life after death he just told me "we don't need to worry about what it's like...we just need to worry about getting there." That just really bothered me which is why I loved the song Hymn for the Dude's by Mott the Hoope. (v. sweet instant christians, you are, such a, sly, clown - too many questions, no replies now.... I use to always relate my life with songs... One of my favorites was Wildflower by Skylark. Don't know how old you are, but it was a hit in 73 when I was 13. Oddly enough I ended up marrying the guitar player from the band and married him : ) (I'm a romantic). I don't know if blokes like yourself know much about the English, but David Foster (Sir David Foster) is from British Columbia but has been knighted. He has played with and or produced groups from the Beatles to Michael Jackson...

Anyway, I have believed strongly in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints since then. I faltered for about 24 hours once when some polygamists got hold of me and got me confused. This guy made me mad. He told me he wanted me to meekly and quietly speak while I was going off on him at one point. I found out later these 2 guys had been ex'd even from their apostate church for having orgies with his wives. (That was NOT how it worked even when they did do it in the early days of the church. Now, some of that, has been a hard pill to swallow for me at times....but I've read a lot on it and feel fine about it. I don't like being associated with the groups living it now, though. Its kind of strange. Our pioneers back then dressed that way from the era..but they are living like its still the era even. They dress like the Amish. Worse...just strange. I like the Amish.

Not too much can throw me off, but if you have any other comments, go for it. I do want to look into what you have brought up, still.

All the best to you too : ) I've fallen asleep about 5 times writing this. Hope it sounds lucid.

Jeanie

















On the other hand, there are lots of evidences that verify what the BofM talks about. However, as with the Bible, you do have to pray about whether its true or not and someone who doesn't even believe in God is not likely to do that at this point at least.

If there is evidence then prayer is not needed, show me the evidence. I’m open to evidence, good evidence, that’s what I base my ‘beliefs’ on. But you’re right, I’m not about to start praying about it any time soon. I gave that up long ago.

LOL did you know that Joseph Smith also appears to quote Shakespeare in 2 Nephi 1:14. "From whence no traveller can return" is a line from Hamlet. Coincidence maybe.

I appreciate you even entertaining the idea, though. Check out Third Nephi, sometime...

I’ll have a look when I get time. I seem to remember that it too had a few historical problems but I don’t remember the details.

All the best Jeanie

Russell [/quote]

Hey Russell2, I've been looking into it and, apparently, Moroni (the original author of that book in the Book of Mormon but, in this case, as an angel when he appeared to Joseph Smith to teach him...) quoted from Malachi directly to Joseph Smith. (The Book of Mormon itself has no quotes from Malachi that I remember ever hearing or can now find...)


From LDS.org "What did Joseph Smith learn in his visits with Moroni? Moroni taught Joseph Smith from scripture, quoting Malachi, Isaiah, Joel, and Acts. John Taylor explained: "Joseph Smith in the first place was set apart by the Almighty according to the [councils] of the Gods in the eternal worlds, to introduce the principles of life among the people. . . . The principles which he had, placed him in communication with . . . Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, Adam, Seth, Enoch, and Jesus and the Father and the apostles that lived on this continent as well as those who lived on the Asiatic continent. . . . Why? Because he had to introduce a dispensation which was called the dispensation of the fulness of times, and it was known as such by the ancient servants of God" (Deseret News Weekly, June 9, 1880, 280).


I also looked up "cockatrice’s, dragons, satyrs, fiery flying serpents" in 2nd Nephi and that is all from where he is quoting from Isaiah... (Chs. 11 & 15, etc.) That's the hardest part to get through in the Book of Mormon.... It is mostly talking about the coming Millenial reign. Isaiah is a hard book to understand... very symbolic.

Hi Jeanie

I also looked up "cockatrice’s, dragons, satyrs, fiery flying serpents" in 2nd Nephi and that is all from where he is quoting from Isaiah... (Chs. 11 & 15, etc.) That's the hardest part to get through in the Book of Mormon.... It is mostly talking about the coming Millenial reign. Isaiah is a hard book to understand... very symbolic.

Yes symbolic use of mytical creatures as if they really existed quoted from another book as if it were speaking the absolute truth. For me this still doesn’t answer why these creature are in the book. If they are not real, and I strongly suspect that they are not, why include them in a book that is supposed to speak god’s truth? Why would a angle related myth to Joseph Smith to be included in TboM, why not stick to truth so later readers would have one more clue to the validity of it?

All the best Jeanie

Russell

Hi Jeanie

Jeanie: Two references that explain the reason..... nothing suspicious to me.
The two passages you site state that he learned Egyptian but in his time it appears very very unlikely that he would have. It was a language virtually among the Israelites of 600BCE as far as we can tell and even if some did (there’s no evidence that any did but for arguments sake) why would he chose a language that only he among his people could read if he was recording this stuff for posterity or even as a memory prompter?

R2: It’s still hard to explain that Nephi quotes in around 590 BCE from a book that was not written till almost 200 years later. Malachi was written around 420 BCE.
Jeanie: The only scripture I'm aware of them quoting is from Isaiah.....
2 Nephi 22:15 is virtually word for word Malachi 4:1

Jeanie: It wasn't from the Book of Mormon (chapter and verse). Just referring to the ruins....probably stated poorly. (I'm sure you know something about that you'll refute... : ) Here, I;ll refute myself. Actually when I referred to people we didn't know of, its more civilizatoins...like ancient ones. Discovered in Peru, The Mayas, Aztecs.
That sounds like a stretch. It’s easy for a book to vaguely mention other people’s but you can’t then, rationally, stretch that to include any specific other people’s that are discovered. It needs to be specific to count for anything or he may have been talking about anyone.

By the way I’m just a few years younger than you. I remember the songs of 73 though not that one off the top of my head.

I also looked up "cockatrice’s, dragons, satyrs, fiery flying serpents" in 2nd Nephi and that is all from where he is quoting from Isaiah... (Chs. 11 & 15, etc.) That's the hardest part to get through in the Book of Mormon.... It is mostly talking about the coming Millenial reign. Isaiah is a hard book to understand... very symbolic.
Yes symbolic use of mystical creatures as if they really existed quoted from another book as if it were speaking the absolute truth. For me this still doesn’t answer why these creature are in the book. If they are not real, and I strongly suspect that they are not, why include them in a book that is supposed to speak god’s truth? Why would an angle related myth to Joseph Smith to be included in TboM, why not stick to truth so later readers would have one more clue to the validity of it?

All the best Jeanie

Russell

R2: 2 Nephi 22:15 is virtually word for word Malachi 4:1

Jeanie: By gum, you are correct! Actually its from 3rd Nephi, though. (Typo, no doubt).

THIRD NEPHI
THE BOOK OF NEPHI
THE SON OF NEPHI, WHO WAS THE SON OF HELAMAN
CHAPTER 25
At the Second Coming the proud and wicked shall be burned as stubble—Elijah shall return before that great and dreadful day—Compare Malachi 4. [A.D. 34]
1 For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
2 But unto you that fear my name, shall the Son of Righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth and grow up as calves in the stall.
3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of Hosts.
4 Remember ye the law of Moses, my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord;
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

However, the time of 3rd Nephi was when Christ was on the earth and came to the Americas! These are the summaries of the chapters and note in CH 23 that Christ approves of their record of Isaiah. (I gather he verified its accuracy). So this (the Malachi quote) is likely a new revelation to them....but a repetition of what was already stated in previous records.

Here are the summaries of the chapters of Third Nephi.

THIRD NEPHI
THE BOOK OF NEPHI
THE SON OF NEPHI, WHO WAS THE SON OF HELAMAN
CHAPTERS
3 Nephi 1
Nephi, son of Helaman, departs out of the land, and his son Nephi keeps the records—Though signs and wonders abound, the wicked plan to slay the righteous—The night of Christ’s birth arrives—The sign is given and a new star arises—Lyings and deceivings increase, and the Gadianton robbers slaughter many. Between A.D. 1 and 4
3 Nephi 2
Wickedness and abominations increase among the people—The Nephites and Lamanites unite to defend themselves against the Gadianton robbers—Converted Lamanites become white and are called Nephites. Between A.D. 5 and 15
3 Nephi 3
Giddianhi, the Gadianton leader, demands that Lachoneus and the Nephites surrender themselves and their lands—Lachoneus appoints Gidgiddoni as chief captain of the armies—The Nephites assemble in Zarahemla and Bountiful to defend themselves. Between A.D. 16 and 17
3 Nephi 4
The Nephite armies defeat the Gadianton robbers—Giddianhi is slain, and his successor, Zemnarihah, is hanged—The Nephites praise the Lord for their victories. Between A.D. 18 and 22
3 Nephi 5
The Nephites repent and forsake their sins—Mormon writes the history of his people and declares the everlasting word to them—Israel shall be gathered in from her long dispersion. Between A.D. 21 and 26
3 Nephi 6
The Nephites prosper—Pride, wealth, and class distinctions arise—The Church is rent with dissensions—Satan leads the people in open rebellion—Many prophets cry repentance and are slain—Their murderers conspire to take over the government. Between A.D. 26 and 30
3 Nephi 7
The chief judge is murdered, the government is overthrown, and the people divide into tribes—Jacob, an antichrist, becomes king of a league of tribes—Nephi preaches repentance and faith in Christ—Angels minister to him daily, and he raises his brother from the dead—Many repent and are baptized. Between A.D. 30 and 33
3 Nephi 8
Tempests, earthquakes, fires, whirlwinds, and physical upheavals attest the crucifixion of Christ—Many people are destroyed—Darkness covers the land for three days—Those who remain bemoan their fate. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 9
In the darkness the voice of Christ proclaims the destruction of many people and cities for their wickedness—He also proclaims his divinity, announces that the law of Moses is fulfilled, and invites men to come unto him and be saved. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 10
There is silence in the land for many hours—The voice of Christ promises to gather his people as a hen gathereth her chickens—The more righteous part of the people had been preserved. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 11
The Father testifies of his Beloved Son—Christ appears and proclaims his atonement—The people feel the wound marks in his hands and feet and side—They cry Hosanna—He sets forth the mode and manner of baptism—The spirit of contention is of the devil—Christ’s doctrine is that men should believe and be baptized and receive the Holy Ghost. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 12
Jesus calls and commissions the Twelve—He delivers to the Nephites a discourse similar to the Sermon on the Mount—He speaks the Beatitudes—His teachings transcend and take precedence over the law of Moses—Men are commanded to be perfect even as he and his Father are perfect—Compare Matthew 5. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 13
Jesus teaches the Nephites the Lord’s Prayer—They are to lay up treasures in heaven—The Twelve in their ministry are commanded to take no thought for temporal things—Compare Matthew 6. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 14
Jesus commands: Judge not; ask of God; beware of false prophets—He promises salvation to those who do the will of the Father—Compare Matthew 7. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 15
Jesus announces that the law of Moses is fulfilled in him—The Nephites are the other sheep of whom he spake in Jerusalem—Because of iniquity the Lord’s people in Jerusalem do not know of the scattered sheep of Israel. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 16
Jesus will visit others of the lost sheep of Israel—In the latter days the gospel will go to the Gentiles and then to the house of Israel—The Lord’s people shall see eye to eye when he brings again Zion. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 17
Jesus directs the people to ponder his words and pray for understanding—He heals their sick—He prays for the people, using language that cannot be written—Angels minister to and fire encircles their little ones. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 18
Jesus institutes the sacrament among the Nephites—They are commanded to pray always in his name—Those who eat his flesh and drink his blood unworthily are damned—The disciples are given power to confer the Holy Ghost. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 19
The Twelve Disciples minister unto the people and pray for the Holy Ghost—They are baptized and receive the Holy Ghost and the ministering of angels—Jesus prays using words that cannot be written—He attests to the exceedingly great faith of these Nephites. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 20
Jesus provides bread and wine miraculously and again administers the sacrament unto them—The remnant of Jacob shall come to the knowledge of the Lord their God and shall inherit the Americas—Jesus is the prophet like unto Moses, and the Nephites are children of the prophets—Others of the Lord’s people shall be gathered to Jerusalem. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 21
Israel shall be gathered when the Book of Mormon comes forth—The Gentiles shall be established as a free people in America—They shall be saved if they believe and obey; otherwise they shall be cut off and destroyed—Israel shall build the New Jerusalem, and the lost tribes shall return. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 22
In the last days, Zion and her stakes shall be established, and Israel shall be gathered in mercy and tenderness—They shall triumph—Compare Isaiah 54. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 23
Jesus approves the words of Isaiah—He commands the people to search the prophets—The words of Samuel the Lamanite concerning the resurrection are added to their records. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 24
The Lord’s messenger shall prepare the way for the Second Coming—Christ shall sit in judgment—Israel is commanded to pay tithes and offerings—A book of remembrance is kept—Compare Malachi 3. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 25
At the Second Coming the proud and wicked shall be burned as stubble—Elijah shall return before that great and dreadful day—Compare Malachi 4. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 26
Jesus expounds all things from the beginning to the end—Babes and children utter marvelous things which cannot be written—Those in the Church of Christ have all things in common among them. [A.D. 34]
3 Nephi 27
Jesus commands them to call the Church in his name—His mission and atoning sacrifice constitute his gospel—Men are commanded to repent and be baptized that they may be sanctified by the Holy Ghost—They are to be even as Jesus is. Between A.D. 34 and 35
3 Nephi 28
Nine of the Twelve desire and are promised an inheritance in Christ’s kingdom when they die—The Three Nephites desire and are given power over death so as to remain on the earth until Jesus comes again—They are translated and see things not lawful to utter, and they are now ministering among men. Between A.D. 34 and 35
3 Nephi 29
The coming forth of the Book of Mormon is a sign that the Lord has commenced to gather Israel and fulfill his covenants—Those who reject his latter-day revelations and gifts shall be cursed. Between A.D. 34 and 35
3 Nephi 30
The latter-day Gentiles are commanded to repent and come unto Christ and be numbered with the house of Israel. Between A.D. 34 and 35

Dang, just lost a bunch of stuff I typed. Anyway, I found where, apparently, reformed Egyptian was a type of shorthand. Hebrew in comparison to the English language and other western languages can use 7-10 words to convey what a normal English sentence takes about 15 words to say. Apparently as stated in Mormon 9: 32, 33, in vs. 33 it states that there wasn't enough room on the plates to use Hebrew, so the reformed was an even more compact way to write. It was harder to be as exact or precise, though, as well.

R2: That sounds like a stretch. It’s easy for a book to vaguely mention other people’s but you can’t then, rationally, stretch that to include any specific other people’s that are discovered. It needs to be specific to count for anything or he may have been talking about anyone.

Jeanie: But we know those are the people the Book of Mormon was talking about. And also their relatives in the isles, etc. The temples and pyramids weren't known of at the time this record was found and translated. That is my point.... Kind of odd as well that EGYPTIAN architecture was found don't you think?

Hi Jeanie

R2: 2 Nephi 22:15 is virtually word for word Malachi 4:1
Jeanie: By gum, you are correct! Actually its from 3rd Nephi, though. (Typo, no doubt).
It was a typo in my copy of the book of mormon Malachi 4:1 is first quoted in 1 Nephi 22:15

Dang, just lost a bunch of stuff I typed. Anyway, I found where, apparently, reformed Egyptian was a type of shorthand. Hebrew in comparison to the English language and other western languages can use 7-10 words to convey what a normal English sentence takes about 15 words to say. Apparently as stated in Mormon 9: 32, 33, in vs. 33 it states that there wasn't enough room on the plates to use Hebrew, so the reformed was an even more compact way to write. It was harder to be as exact or precise, though, as well.

I’ve never heard that answer to this challenge. It still seems like a stretch to me, surely god’s treasuries are not that stretched that they could not afford a few extra gold plates to allow him to write the piece in a language that he and his people would commonly know? It would have the advantage of precision and it would avoid all the translation problems that they would have given that it was unknown among them in the historical record to know reformed Egyptian at all so chances are that at most very few of them did. In fact why not use a material that was cheaper and more durable than gold in the first place and let him be as verbose as necessary to avoid all the confusion that we see today?

R2: That sounds like a stretch. It’s easy for a book to vaguely mention other people’s but you can’t then, rationally, stretch that to include any specific other people’s that are discovered. It needs to be specific to count for anything or he may have been talking about anyone.

Jeanie: But we know those are the people the Book of Mormon was talking about. And also their relatives in the isles, etc.

How do we know?

The temples and pyramids weren't known of at the time this record was found and translated. That is my point....

I don’t rembember the book of Mormon mentioning Pyramids? Can you cite me chapter and verse on that so I can read what it says about them?

Kind of odd as well that EGYPTIAN architecture was found don't you think?

The similarities to the Egyptian architecture is very superficial. The internal structure of the south America pyramids is totally different and their use was also very different. There are only so many ways to build a structure the size of the pyramids or they would, as is seen in a number of locations, simply fall down. The pyramid is a very stable structure so it’s not really surprising that more than one culture built them, their experiments with other shapes fell down to show them the error of their ways. The City of pyramids in the Peruvian desert is around 5000 years old which also seems a problem for the Mormon timeline.

All the best Jeanie

Russell

R2: I’ve never heard that answer to this challenge.

Jeanie: It was right there in my Book of Mormon religion manual from when I went to college back in the early 80s. And just like it states in scripture, it was reformed because it was adjusted to their "manner of speaking." And, no, not enough room on the plates. They were already pretty hefty in the state they were found.

The rest, R2, is just your viewpoint and nothing I can really do anything about. You are determined not to believe anything....

No hard feelings, though, I hope.

Hi Jeanie

Jeanie: It was right there in my Book of Mormon religion manual from when I went to college back in the early 80s. And just like it states in scripture, it was reformed because it was adjusted to their "manner of speaking."

But we have really good reason to believe that they didn’t’ speak any form of Egyptian, that’s the whole problem with this idea. It’s like me writing a really important book in Modern Greek. I don’t speak Greek, my friends don’t speak Greek (actually one does, maybe I should have said polish). Why would I choose a language that it’s improbable that I would speak and which no one around me speaks? Even if I had somehow learned Polish, why would I write in it, even if it was more efficient, if my audience could not read it? All the evidence suggests that Israelites of 600 BCE did not speak Egyptian, reformed or otherwise.

And, no, not enough room on the plates. They were already pretty hefty in the state they were found.

Surely god could afford the gold to make more, make an extra volume maybe. Isn’t that possible? So why the limit? It does not make logical sense.

The rest, R2, is just your viewpoint and nothing I can really do anything about. You are determined not to believe anything....

On the contrary I am determined to believe many things, in fact I already do, but I have very strict criteria on what they are. Demonstrable truth or at least strong rational grounds for accepting them are high on the list.

It is not just my opinion that pyramids are quite common for the really simple reason that with limited technology other shapes fall down. Pyramids are known from Egypt, North and South America, Mesopotamia, Sudan, Rome, Thanjavur and Europe. It is not just my opinion that the South American pyramids bear very little resemblance to the Egyptian ones, they have stairs up the outside and a temple on top and no burial chamber inside.

It is not just my opinion that there does not appear to be any documentary reason to believe that the peoples of the Americas are the one’s talked about in the Book of Mormon especially given that we have very strong archaeological evidence that they had already lived here for thousands of years by 600BCE.

No no hard feelings, I hope the same is true for you. Are you interested in looking into how we are so sure that the ancient people of America lived there long before the book of Mormon suggests? Are you interested in looking into how any of the physical evidence we have discussed is used scientifically to produce the picture we have of the earth’s history today. It’s not a lie or a fabrication it is the honest work of a great many very intelligent, well trained, dedicated and talented people over a long period of time. There is no mega conspiracy behind it the evidence I have presented here on the age of these people’s occupation of America is founded on very solid evidence. Are you interested in exploring what that evidence has to say and how these conclusions are reached? It will take some time and effort to learn the basics if how this science works but its fascinating IMHO.

All the best Jeanie.

Russell

R2, I'll have to think about this and get back to you. Right now I'm very overwhelmed with all the things we have going on and working (with my back and neck killing me). I don't want to rush an answer cause my first reaction is emotional mainly just cause I'm stressed. (And tired).

One point, though, that I can come up with off the top of my head is that there WERE people's who were here around the time of the Tower of Babel that we have record of because the Book of Mormon people actually met them and were given their records. There were people here, (and evidence that even Vikings had visited) but this particular family who pretty much became the Lamanites (Native Americans and their branches) are the ones who came over around 600 BC. (The remnants of the Nephites, for the most part at least, were killed off).

The other point is that they carried these plates around...sometimes literally running from those pursuing them. It wasn't about the amount of gold but the impracticality of carrying around even larger plates than what they already were. They held up, though! (If you wonder about the material.....) But they had plenty of gold down there didn't they~! : )

Not sure if the buildings are true pyramids actually, but definitely that style. Lots of things are egyptian style in their culture......

My only other thought off the top of my head is that its kind of hard to say a particular family didn't speak a certain language or that they weren't bilingual. It was a family...... It just started out as one family. (With one other man and his daughters). I'm not even sure how it worked - if they spoke two languages or wrote in one and spoke more in the other. The point of it being reformed, I THINK, had to do with the language being altered DUE TO THEIR MANNER OF SPEAKING like it says in the scripture I sent before.... I have to see what I can find on that, though. (And what I'd said about the shorthand issue). We're coming from two different directions here. I already believe it so am trying to back it up when these things (some of them) aren't something that have bothered me before. You question every fine detail of everything.... Nothing wrong with that, but to be fair, you may have to put some things aside and just listen to the spirit. That takes practice and experience I suppose...... (And faith even the size of a mustard seed or even the desire to believe....).

Hi Jeanie

One point, though, that I can come up with off the top of my head is that there WERE people's who were here around the time of the Tower of Babel that we have record of because the Book of Mormon people actually met them and were given their records. There were people here, (and evidence that even Vikings had visited) but this particular family who pretty much became the Lamanites (Native Americans and their branches) are the ones who came over around 600 BC. (The remnants of the Nephites, for the most part at least, were killed off).
If the book of Mormon is consistent with the idea that there were well established cultures in America long before 600BCE then it is in accord with the facts as revealed by scientific research over there. There is good reason to believe that native American culture predates 600BCE by many thousands of years. This is established by the consistent nature of their artefacts. If the Lamanites arrived around 600BCE then the evidence strongly suggest that they were not the ancestors of the current Native Americans who have a continuous and consistent culture that dates back far longer than that.

The other point is that they carried these plates around...sometimes literally running from those pursuing them. It wasn't about the amount of gold but the impracticality of carrying around even larger plates than what they already were. They held up, though! (If you wonder about the material.....) But they had plenty of gold down there didn't they~! : )
LOL yes carrying them around while running away from someone would be difficult wouldn’t it. Maybe parchment or even plastic would have been better, gold was far from the best medium for recording words on available at the time, it was certainly impractical if you had to carry it around by hand and if god was supplying the materials anything should have been possible. As I say it strikes me as implausible.

Not sure if the buildings are true pyramids actually, but definitely that style. Lots of things are egyptian style in their culture......
The south American pyramids were indeed pyramids though it’s pretty clear that they did not get their ideas from the Egyptians, except for the gross shape, which was a physical necessity given their level of technology, they were very different in use, design and structure to the Egyptian examples.

My only other thought off the top of my head is that its kind of hard to say a particular family didn't speak a certain language or that they weren't bilingual. It was a family...... It just started out as one family. (With one other man and his daughters). I'm not even sure how it worked - if they spoke two languages or wrote in one and spoke more in the other. The point of it being reformed, I THINK, had to do with the language being altered DUE TO THEIR MANNER OF SPEAKING like it says in the scripture I sent before.... I have to see what I can find on that, though. (And what I'd said about the shorthand issue). We're coming from two different directions here. I already believe it so am trying to back it up when these things (some of them) aren't something that have bothered me before. You question every fine detail of everything.... Nothing wrong with that, but to be fair, you may have to put some things aside and just listen to the spirit. That takes practice and experience I suppose...... (And faith even the size of a mustard seed or even the desire to believe....).
Yes we do come at this from very different angles, I try to look impassionately at the evidence without faith and just see where it leads. I am presented with so many contradictory religious claims that I don’t see a choice to this approach if I wish to have any chance to find the truth. I used to pray and listen to the spirit but they speak really really really quietly in my experience. Maybe I needed a hearing aid.

And yes this sort of examination does get nit picky but then that should not be a challenge to a true word of god. A perfect being should be able to inspire a perfect book.

I never said that they could not have spoken Reformed Egyptian only that the physical evidence suggests that it is very unlikely. At that time there is no record of any Israelites knowing any Egyptian. Of course some might have, it’s a big world, but we have no evidence to support that notion. I guess that’s were we differ, I don’t accept the book of Mormon as a source of good historical evidence. It blew it for me when it said so many physically improbable things. So I look for other sources to support what it says now and I don’t find them. Maybe they did know Reformed Egyptian (being able to write it was by far less common than being able to speak it yet we have no evidence of either among the Israelites of 600BCE. So maybe they did but on the balance of probability we’d have to say that it is very unlikely.

Maybe the modern Native Americans arrived in America around 600BCE but again we are faced with an evidence conflict. Your book says it is so but the physical evidence shows a continuous culture existed here from long before that and it continued uninterrupted until far more modern times with the well known invasion of America from various peoples. Maybe it did happen, maybe they assimilated invisibly into the existing society and replaced all of the people who were already here but there’s no reason to believe so outside the book of Mormon.

Another line of evidence that we should expect to find if this story were true is genetic, such a small starter population would produce a pronounced genetic bottleneck which could be detected by genetic testing. It has not been and in fact the evidence supports the idea that Native Americans have had a long standing and diverse culture in the US for well over 10000 years. Unlike the earlier evidence this piece is harder to explain, it’s not just that we are missing some evidence that would confirm the story we have very specific evidence that no genetic bottle neck such as Joseph Smith described has occurred to the US Native Americans for a far longer time that the book of Mormon allows.

It may sound nit picky but the truth or otherwise of a text is often found in the details.

All the best Jeanie. Good luck with the back and the neck and don’t rush to answer, wait till you feel up to it. I’ll be here.

Russell

This isn't accurate. The final sentence does not contribute to the argument significantly.

"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."

That's merely and appeal to emotion. Perhaps not everyone is afraid to evaluate the evidence and find out for themselves whether or not God exists. Denying it on an a priori basis out of fear is not what reasonable people do, is it?

As this thread's been a sort of catch-all for a while now, I figure it's as good a place as any.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/triassic-shore-birds/

The "bird-like" bird tracks evolutionists have been so keen on denying have been compared to the tracks made by living birds. Take-off, landing, moving around. These sort of activities account for the alleged "differences" - that's why they weren't "perfect" footprints of birds.

Say bye-bye to another gap. Of course only willpower could ever have convinced anyone to call them anything but bird tracks in the first place. Much skimpier and lower-grade evidence has been celebrated to no end whenever it has been ambiguous enough to support the mythology.

Silly me!

From the abstract:

The old change-the-date trick! Implications-first

We have observed no such thing. This statement is baseless.


"... Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."

—Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 179


"I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science."

—Charles Darwin: In a letter to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/05/a_primer_on_the_tree_of_life_p_2.html



Of course, those how believe in the evogoddess of luck don't care one bit about how ridiculous the picture gets. "It just happened."

Neither do they care at all about being scientific. In science one does not say "Here's the rule" and then ignore thousands upon thousands of discoveries which defy the rule. How many exceptions would be allowed for Ohm's Law?

Many pages back, but perhaps worth the trouble to point out a fact

Having a different species name means nothing at all. There are several conventions in taxonomy, and one of them is to give different names to fossil specimens, whether or not they differ from contemporary species. One reason for this is that it avoids confusion in cases where a better specimen turns up and turns out to demonstrate a difference. The less-defined and earlier specimen either has to be renamed, or it looks like it's different than the better-defined, although they're believed to be the same thing.

The drawback is pretty obvious: fossil specimens which are perfectly identical with living specimens will have different names. This has the potential to confuse amateurs who don't know what's what.

Whether we agree with the convention or not, it is in play.

And they may have to take back their implications-first revision.

Science Daily

I'd add some bold, but where would I stop? Had a hard enough time cutting the citation down as much as I did.

We should applaud bold professionals who risk their funding for truth, in any case. You may not see this, Professor Ruben, but I salute you. Watch out for bricks and sharp objects mixed in with the mud they'll be flinging your way. And please don't let them intimidate you. It is the coward who must flee from truth - not the other way 'round.

http://www.darwinism-watch.com/index.php?git=makale&makale_id=1863


The "mistake" is reported to have been corrected; but future "mistakes" may be in store.

If true, it was fairly. I don't buy the story without reservation. It's easy to believe what we want. I haven't looked into the business of HY being jailed. If anyone knows the deal, I'd be curious; but I don't plan on tracking down the truth on this one.

You gotta see this.

Possibly the best debunk ever on eye evostories. "Light-sensitive spot"? I think I'll laugh every time I hear that one for the rest of my days.

Thought I'd share this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Buckland

Guess it's not just dinos... Of course further investigation would be in order before coming to any firm conclusions. Wiki is wiki after all.

This thread seems like a most appropriate place to post a link to

The Devil's Dictionary of Evolution

Funny!! One should keep that as future reference!

This is truly FANTASTIC!

The Devil's Dictionary of Evolution ~

Thank you, CTD, for posting this on here. So appropriate!

Sincerely, Abishag

You're all mighty welcome. Notice the date it was originally published? I've long maintained evolutionism isn't innovative; same old worn-out lies over and over and over.

They keep repeating them, but they fail; reality remains reality. Proper scientific procedure requires one to abandon hypotheses which fail experimental tests. Enchantments (at least this group) don't work.