Why is empirical evidence so wonderful when it confirms our
Rebelx said:
Quote:
well one reason is that it is much easier to prove the existence of something than to prove its nonexistence. Can anyone think of anything so definitive that it would disprove Christianity, Islam, Mormonism? There is a real yearning for tangible evidence of faiths in many religions. Remember the burial box of John, brother of Jesus (I think)? It created a lot of excitement. Of course it also turned out to be a forgery. |
there will always be fragmentary tangible evidence
enough to push the faithful along, but not enough to sway skeptics.
It's just part of the plan, that we link the symnaptic gaps of reasoning with faith. |
Quote:
I agree when you say that it's a disservice to lead people to believe that they are descendants of Lehi when we can't really be sure that is so. I'm about 2/3 of the way through An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon by John L. Sorenson, and it seems to me that his theory that Lehi and his family came to a land already populated is pretty sound. In fact, I would suspect that it would be virtually impossible to find any native Mesoamericans today whose DNA could be traced directly to Lehi. But this is the story we've grown up with, that the American Indians are the direct descendants of Lehi, and many of us are not comfortable with questioning that view. Doesn't it make sense that if you truly have a testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, that you would welcome any evidence or facts relating to it, even if they seem to contradict what you believe to be true about it, because you know that they cannot, in the end, disprove it? Instead, many LDS seem to carefully guard against contradictory facts or discoveries, as they may shake the foundations of their testimony. |
I have a friend that curiously was not exposed to anti-Mormon literature until he was about 31 or so (he is a RM). The unlikely source of this was Under the Banner of Heaven.
He was inactive basically already, but this book sent him more on an anti- course instead of just being indifferent and skeptical. Very sad. So Socalcoug, some people are that weak. |
Quote:
By the way, I'm not familiar with "Under the Banner of Heaven." |
I read it as well. The book had research problems(Including several things that sounded suspiciouly like rumors that the author heard) but it also just wasn't written very well. It jumped all over the place and was sometimes hard to follow.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.