Any LDS people around? I am.

Originally posted by whiteknight26
eyewitnesses have seen the plates and we have their testimonies as well.

Before I leave - I will give the title of an excellent book. This book was written by someone who is not LDS, yet what he wrote actually validates the Book of Mormon.

"1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus"

If anyone wishes to discuss this further, please challenge me to a game. We can discuss this further.

Originally posted by whiteknight26
eyewitnesses have seen the plates and we have their testimonies as well.

Before I leave - I will give the title of an excellent book. This book was written by someone who is not LDS, yet what he wrote actually validates the Book of Mormon.

"1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus"

If anyone wishes to discuss this further, please challenge me to a game. We can discuss this further.

Originally posted by menace71
21 And it came to pass that the people of Nephi did till the land, and araise all manner of grain, and of fruit, and bflocks of herds, and flocks of all manner of cattle of every kind, and goats, and wild goats, and also many horses. From the book of Mormon.

Interesting Horses did not arrive in the new world until The Europeans came right? Yeah When t ...[text shortened]... . So the Book of Mormon claims horses were in the new world before the Europeans came.

Manny

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
Well, if you think about it, wouldn't it be possible, that within the time frame of the last scripture (AD 26 to 30) that Christ had not arrived in the Americas at the time. During the three days after Christ's death, the entire land was, in essence, destroyed, and the loss of life was phenominal. This is the last mention of horses in the Book of Mormon. ...[text shortened]... fact, though purhaps not relevant, is that mesoamerica is along the Pacific Ring of Fire)

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
Well, if you think about it, wouldn't it be possible, that within the time frame of the last scripture (AD 26 to 30) that Christ had not arrived in the Americas at the time. During the three days after Christ's death, the entire land was, in essence, destroyed, and the loss of life was phenominal. This is the last mention of horses in the Book of Mormon. ...[text shortened]... fact, though purhaps not relevant, is that mesoamerica is along the Pacific Ring of Fire)

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
Well, if you think about it, wouldn't it be possible, that within the time frame of the last scripture (AD 26 to 30) that Christ had not arrived in the Americas at the time. During the three days after Christ's death, the entire land was, in essence, destroyed, and the loss of life was phenominal. This is the last mention of horses in the Book of Mormon. ...[text shortened]... fact, though purhaps not relevant, is that mesoamerica is along the Pacific Ring of Fire)

Originally posted by menace71
I'm just not buying it. There would be some kind of remains. They can find the horse stalls of Solomon for example. They have found the remains of great cities all over the middle east. There may have been horses Pre-historically like Mammoth elephants in the America's but were are the rest of the remains? Also the native Americans were not true city buildi ...[text shortened]... ng destroyed? What happened? Fire? I don't remember that part of the book of Mormon.

Manny

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
Read 3 Nephi 8-9

Perfect example. In 3 Nephi 9 it list all of these cities that were destroyed. You would think that we would find some of the ruins. The Bible list cities as well that God laid judgments on. Nineveh for example. The ruins were found. Babylon is another example. Sodom & Gomorrah. These places can be found on the earth because there is a reality behind it. Why are there not mention of the locations of where these cities were? No references to go by. You know they know some type of cataclysm happened near were Sodom & Gomorrah were located. The city of Jericho another example. The book of Mormon has no reference points at all. There are great rivers & Mountains that you think they would have referenced here in the America's What part of the America's was this supposed to have happened in?


Manny

Most scholars seem to agree that the events occured in Mesoamerica, at which, there are ruins and buildings.

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
Saying lunatic and basing it on nothing just notes that you are a bigot with a closed mind. At least understand what you are arguing against before you start your diarrhea of the mouth.

Originally posted by generalissimo
well, I have no reason to believe he wasn't a lunatic.

plus, he did have some questionable behavior.

just have a look
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_regarding_Mormonism

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
How can I not say that all people who believe in Christ are lunatics? At the time, that WAS what people did. He had QUESTIONABLE behavior, because it was going against their tradition, which they believed to be the Law of Moses, when really he was fulfilling the law, and showing them a higher law. All of those Sadducees and Pharisees had "no reason to believe he wasn't a lunatic" either.

What I'm trying to say is that just because you say someone is a lunatic, it does not mean they are. I could just keep calling YOU a lunatic, and what is your defense? "I'm not a lunatic!"? Why should I believe you? All of your arguments are baseless conjecture, and you aren't willing to defend any of your views with sound reasoning. Who's to not say YOU are the lunatic? As I was saying before, you can't just call someone a lunatic because they don't believe the same things you do, or else that would make all Muslims, Hindus, Atheists, Baptists, Catholics, (sorry I don't know what religion you are) but whatever religion YOU are, all the others are complete lunatics. Thanks for the bigotry sonny. Now, you said most of them. What did you mean by that?

Originally posted by LinkHyrule
What I'm trying to say is that just because you say someone is a lunatic, it does not mean they are. I could just keep calling YOU a lunatic, and what is your defense? "I'm not a lunatic!"? Why should I believe you? All of your arguments are baseless conjecture, and you aren't willing to defend any of your views with sound reasoning. Who's to not say YOU s. Thanks for the bigotry sonny. Now, you said most of them. What did you mean by that?