Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Youtube Videos Added For Review

I just uploaded two videos into my answeringantimormons.com account on youtube. You can find them by going here or here. They address Keith Walker's "The Impossible Gospel of Mormonism", and a recent attack by Rob Sivulka on the LDS and Biblical doctrine of Creation. Let me know what you think.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Glad you got around to Walker's "Impossible Gospel." If you look through the comments on that Youtube video, I was Reklaw008. No one really refuted anything I said. But I haven't been back in a long time. Good stuff.

Anonymous said...

Your impossible Gospel response on youtube was the epitome of straw man. Maybe if you actually knew what Christians believed you wouldn't revel in so many logical fallacies.

Bob the Anti-Anti said...

Epitome of Strawman? Hello, wake-up, I was responding to the total strawman, make-believe conversation reported time and again by Keith. Irony is a difficult concept for many people. Like Shawn McCraney, Keith refuses to engage LDS people who defend the Church. It took me three years in Manti before I even figured out he was not just a Mormon bystander watching the discussions, as he would never engage. Ever. As in Ever. So then he puts out a make believe doctrinal discussion never quoting LDS leaders or sources in their context, and he calls it the "Impossible Gospel of Mormonism", and you are coming after me for strawman argumentation? It was a parody, dude. Because the caricature of Mormonism depicted by Walker is many, many times worse than what I did, because he wants you to think these were things actually said by LDS people so clueless they would mock their own Savior, Jesus Christ.

Did you send him a complaint? What does that say about your sense of equality and fairness?

BTW, I would be delighted if you could point out an area where I fail to understand some flavor of non-Biblical "Christian" doctrine. Since there is a flavor of Christianity for just about every doctrine (Baptism? Essential:Yes/No; Can lose salvation: Yes/No; Good works necessary for salvation: Yes/No; Infant baptism required: Yes/No; Men have free will to choose to accept salvation: Yes/No; King James Bible only inspired Bible: Yes/No). So tell me which flavor I misrepresented, and be sure there is no one of a different flavor among the ranks, and make your point. Then let's go from there.
Thanks for the comment, even if you missed the point of the video.
Bob

Chad said...

Hey Bob,

Great video..all the anti-mormons out there are still losing the battle and don't even know it. They also need to come up with new things to say about the LDS church!

Take care, Chad

Walker said...

I didn't include this in my blog's rebuttal, but Moroni 10 is very similar to Titus 2:11-12: "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age." The Greek "ungodliness" actually means "impiety." The Hebrew literally means "worthlessness." The context of Moroni 10 certainly leans more towards the "impiety" understanding, though worthlessness certainly fits too. We are to rid ourselves of all irreverance and lack of duty towards God and instead love Him entirely. Then the grace is "sufficient" (indicating it was possessed already, not that it is then given). Ether 12 states that grace is sufficient for the humble and meek, but no Anti wants to cross-reference that with Moroni 10 because it doesn't fit their view. Once again, pure New Testament doctrine is taught in the BoM and rejected by critics.

And apparently "all ungodliness" is too much for the antis. Nevermind the "all" that is present in Ezekiel 18:21-31, Ezekiel 11:18-21, Isaiah 1:15-18 ("cease to do evil" certainly sounds like "all"), and many more.

Keep up the good work.

Walker said...

Noticed you were debating Sivulka and Shaf online. I've sworn off YouTube debating, so I will live through you.

In support of God creating from pre-existent element, point out the references to Leviathan in Psalms 74:14 and elsewhere. The NET commentary on this particular verse reads as follows:

"In [West Semitic mythology] Leviathan is a sea creature that symbolizes the destructive water of the sea and, in turn, the forces of chaos that threaten the established order. In the OT, the battle with the sea motif is applied to Yahweh’s victories over the forces of chaos at creation and in history."

The comments on Ps. 89:10 state, "In this case the passage may allude to creation (see vv. 11-12), when God overcame the great deep and brought order out of chaos."

The creation accounts are not consistent within the biblical text, but Gen. 1 along with the mentioning of Leviathan in the Psalms does provide credibility to the doctrine of creation from pre-existent chaos.

Walker said...

Continuing with Leviathan, it is interesting that Job mentions it several times. In the NRSV version of Job 41:9 & 25, it says, "Any hope of capturing [Leviathan] will be disappointed; were not even the gods overwhelmed at the sight of it? ...When [Leviathan] raises itself up the gods are afraid; at the crashing they are beside themselves." In the Ugaritic myths, the gods cast their eyes downward when messengers from the sea approached the assembly. They were called out on this by Baal and El. Baal eventually goes on to defeat Leviathan/chaos to bring about the creation. As many scholars have concluded, Baal is the Canaanite version of Yahweh. It is He who goes on to bring order out of chaos.

All of this certainly demonstrates not only creation from chaos, but also the existence of other divine beings.

Tony said...

I think it's great that you are extending your blog into youtube. Keep at it! Will it raise heck among the critics? Of course. I'm not saying it's fun, but expect me to be on there to show that cayetanohawaii, Doris, and shulamite are misled in their beliefs about the Church.

How anyone could be a member of the Church and then try to turn around and say that we do not preach Christ enough or keep Him at the center of our lives is beyond me. Every Sunday, we remember Christ and learn of His doctrine. I guess because we don't talk about the Atonement every single day, that makes us less Christian to them.

Perhaps I should start keeping tallys. They tell us works mean nothing, but are we going to get into heaven according to them for having mentioned the name Jesus Christ a certain number of times? They seem to miss how He is manifest in the ordinances and in keeping His commandments.

Anyways, I'll stop ranting.

Walker said...

Check out this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/6274502/God-is-not-the-Creator-claims-academic.html

Professor Ellen van Wolde states that "the usual idea of creating-out-of-nothing, creatio ex nihilo, is a big misunderstanding." She retranslates the verse to say "in the beginning God separated the Heaven and the Earth," understanding that "there was already water." She also realizes that Gen. 1:1 is NOT the beginning of time, but the beginning of the narration. It also makes mention of the sea monsters I referenced.

Cool stuff.