It is currently Mon Dec 09, 2019 12:17 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 289 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:10 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9862
Runtu wrote:
My favorite quote from Hamblin:

Quote:
Evidence please. You are not privledged [sic] to assert and assert and assert and never be required to do actual research and provide any evidence. It’s time to put up or shut up.

Wow. What's the context for this statement?

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:15 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
honorentheos wrote:
Wow. What's the context for this statement?


http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticm ... -on-nahom/

Quote:
Hamblin 35: Time for Clear Thinking on Nahom

Alas, Jenkins’ thinking on Nahom is hopelessly muddled.

If NHM can not be accepted an authentic ancient sixth century South Arabian place name, and therefor an authentic match with the Book of Mormon Nahom–and hence evidence for (though not proof of) the historicity of the Book of Mormon–what additional qualities of evidence of place, personal or ethnic names would make it acceptable?

Remember: Coincidence is not an argument, or even an explanation. It is an excuse.

Jenkins claims that Joseph Smith took the name Nahom for an early nineteenth century map of Arabia.

Jenkin’s explanation is simply absurd. Joseph found it on a map? Really? First, there is no evidence for the existence of any such map on the New York frontier in Joseph’s day, let alone that Joseph could have had access to it it. Furthermore, we have a fairly detailed record of Joseph’s activities during the period of the writing of the Book of Mormon; no mention of a research trip to come college library to consult maps. But let’s assume he did. Why, we might ask, would he have decided to travel to consult a map instead of making names up? The only reason would be to create fictional verisimilitude for the book he was fabricating. So, he looks at a map of Arabia to find place names to put in his book. Why not mention Arabia itself? Why not actually mention some of the major cities or regions of Arabia found on the early nineteenth century map he consulted? Mecca? Medina? Sana’a? Jedda? Yemen? Hijaz? Joseph is apparently motivated enough to check maps of Arabia, but doesn’t pick any name that would be noticably Arabian to the average reader. Instead, he picks a minor obscure place name, Nihm, which precisely none of his contemporary readers could ever recognize as Arabian. How could that possibly add verisimilitude to his fictional book? What would be the point of picking an obscure name? Not only that, but he changed the spelling. He didn’t include Nihm in his book. He wrote Nahom, insuring that precisely no one could ever make the connection. So, brazen fraud that he was, he steals a name from a map of Arabia to make his fictional book seem authentic, but stupidly changes the spelling so it is unrecognizable. And not only that, but then he never bothers to mention to anyone: look here, an authentic Arabian name in the Book of Mormon! Really? The theory is simply preposterous. It makes no sense. It’s only purpose is to create a post hoc explanation for a clear authentic sixth century BC Arabian place name in the Book of Mormon.

Second, it is a baseless assertion that most or even many of the place names on early nineteenth century maps of Arabia can be correlated with 6th century BC toponym inscriptions. Hogwash. Evidence please. You are not privledged to assert and assert and assert and never be required to do actual research and provide any evidence. It’s time to put up or shut up.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:19 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9862
Thanks, Runtu. How funny.

Out of curiosity, how strongly does Hamblin assert that the NHM inscription correlates to a place name rather than a tribal name that requires some speculation to fit the criteria of NHM being evidence for a place name? I don't follow his blog and have rarely interacted with him but it doesn't seem out of character from what I've seen quoted of him that he would be taking that jump as a simple matter-of-fact.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:32 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
honorentheos wrote:
Thanks, Runtu. How funny.

Out of curiosity, how strongly does Hamblin assert that the NHM inscription correlates to a place name rather than a tribal name that requires some speculation to fit the criteria of NHM being evidence for a place name? I don't follow his blog and have rarely interacted with him but it doesn't seem out of character from what I've seen quoted of him that he would be taking that jump as a simple matter-of-fact.


He seems to believe pretty strongly that NHM is a solid bullseye. His last few posts on his blog attempt to respond to Jenkins on NHM.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticmirror/

As I mentioned, however, the larger problem for Hamblin is that, even if you accept that it's more likely that Joseph Smith got "Nahom" from gold plates and an angel than it is that he saw it on a common map, it doesn't address Jenkins's challenge at all. Jenkins has asked clearly and simply for New World evidence that meets established evidentiary criteria. Hamblin doesn't have any, so he's forced to argue about NHM instead.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:42 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9862
Runtu wrote:
honorentheos wrote:
Thanks, Runtu. How funny.

Out of curiosity, how strongly does Hamblin assert that the NHM inscription correlates to a place name rather than a tribal name that requires some speculation to fit the criteria of NHM being evidence for a place name? I don't follow his blog and have rarely interacted with him but it doesn't seem out of character from what I've seen quoted of him that he would be taking that jump as a simple matter-of-fact.


He seems to believe pretty strongly that NHM is a solid bullseye. His last few posts on his blog attempt to respond to Jenkins on NHM.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticmirror/

As I mentioned, however, the larger problem for Hamblin is that, even if you accept that it's more likely that Joseph Smith got "Nahom" from gold plates and an angel than it is that he saw it on a common map, it doesn't address Jenkins's challenge at all. Jenkins has asked clearly and simply for New World evidence that meets established evidentiary criteria. Hamblin doesn't have any, so he's forced to argue about NHM instead.

Yeah.

It's interesting to me how aggressively the NHM evidence, along with the three witness testimonies, gets argued for by apologists as sufficient to counter any and all other claims of counter-evidence or the lack of positive evidence for the Book of Mormon's validity as an ancient account merely put to paper in the 19th century. Yet in both cases the aggressive users almost never deal well with accepting the nature of this evidence at face-value. The evidence has to be inflated to some degree to then be weaponized.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:56 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
honorentheos wrote:
Yeah.

It's interesting to me how aggressively the NHM evidence, along with the three witness testimonies, gets argued for by apologists as sufficient to counter any and all other claims of counter-evidence or the lack of positive evidence for the Book of Mormon's validity as an ancient account merely put to paper in the 19th century. Yet in both cases the aggressive users almost never deal well with accepting the nature of this evidence at face-value. The evidence has to be inflated to some degree to then be weaponized.


Yep. At first glance, NHM looks pretty good, but then you find out there's a simple explanation that is far more likely than gold plates. The demand that critics "prove" the simple explanation is merely an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Essentially, for NHM to work as evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon, the apologists have to show that Joseph having seen the name on a map is less likely than his having been visited by an angel. Until they can do that, it merits no further investigation.

And, even when I was a believing Mormon, I never understood why people put so much value in the testimony of three witnesses, or the eight for that matter. At best, they saw something they thought was ancient gold plates, but their testimony has no probative value. Even if we grant that they saw these plates, they can't tell us definitively that they were a record of an ancient American people. So, I weigh their testimony against the book itself, which is clearly a 19th-century production.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:57 am 
God

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:39 am
Posts: 16804
Quote:
Jenkin’s explanation is simply absurd. Joseph found it on a map? Really? First, there is no evidence for the existence of any such map on the New York frontier in Joseph’s day

But there is ample evidence of resurrected ghost-beings leading people to secret treasures that contain lost golden books that can be translated via telepathy in Joseph's Day. Clearly Hamblin holds no evidential double standards here.

Again, I'm more inclined to chalk this up to a weak coincidence deriving from Smith's tendency to use variations of Biblical names in the Book of Mormon. I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least a few of these coincidences lurking out there given the hit space available. It would be much more impressive evidence (and would justify Hamblin's use of "precise") if more specific details matched-up. I think proponents of this argument recognize this in attempting to line up more specific information, but this ends up being quite weak and veers into Bible-Code level hit seeking. You can have a debate over whether this is good historical inference, but Hamblin seems eager to throw the discipline under the bus if you get into the nitty-gritty of it with him.

If Hamblin wants to dismiss maps as an alternative explanation for why this place-name appears in the text, he has to compare those reasons for dismissal against his own preferred theory for why that place-name appears in the text.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 8:06 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
EAllusion wrote:
But there is ample evidence of resurrected ghost-beings leading people to secret treasures that contain lost golden books that can be translated via telepathy in Joseph's Day. Clearly Hamblin holds no evidential double standards here.


It really is that bad. "Put the map in Joseph's hand, or I will not believe, but I'm all in on peep stones and visions and supernatural beings."

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 8:19 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6697
moksha wrote:
Proof that archeology can be inexact and loaded with non-empirical theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNcUqmRq9KY


who is the old guy at the beginning and very end of that video?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 8:20 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9862
Runtu wrote:
EAllusion wrote:
But there is ample evidence of resurrected ghost-beings leading people to secret treasures that contain lost golden books that can be translated via telepathy in Joseph's Day. Clearly Hamblin holds no evidential double standards here.


It really is that bad. "Put the map in Joseph's hand, or I will not believe, but I'm all in on peep stones and visions and supernatural beings."

What a great gig Hamblin has.

On the one hand - a map with a place name in the correct time period with geographical possibility of Joseph Smith being able to access it.

On the other hand - a temple inscription of a tribal name from the correct period with geographical possibility (setting aside how much wider the umbrella for the Lehite party can be cast) of being on the Lehite party's route.

Minus the religious preconceptions I'm not sure why anyone would argue even these are equally probable. Insert angels, miraculous compasses, gold plate inscribed religious histories of a developed Christian nature, and significant but non-evidenced cultures in Pre-Columbian Americas compared to the obvious 19th century influences in the Book of Mormon and it becomes clear one has to really wants the NHM inscription to be the correct explanation to think there is some kind of parity here.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:15 am 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9352
Hamblin is now putting words in Jenkins' mouth, not a good strategy:

Jenkins asks him to post this comment, in response to Hamblin saying Jenkins tacitly admitted there is evidence for the Book of Mormon:

Quote from Jenkins:

"You [Hamblin] write this:

'[Jenkins] insists that we provide “credible and plausible” evidence.  This is progress of a sort.  At least tacitly, he seems to have agreed that there is evidence for the Book of Mormon of a sort.  His problem now is that he doesn’t find it “credible and plausible.” '

This is absolutely wrong and incorrect. At no point have I ever suggested that there is any evidence whatever in support for the historicity or historical value of the Book of Mormon. I have never suggested or stated that tacitly, or openly, and it is wrong to suggest that I have. Nor do I understand how you could draw that bizarre conclusion from anything I have written."

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticm ... -evidence/

Hamblin responds to this with the same bad strategy, by saying Jenkins means proof when he says evidence:

Apparently Jenkins does not understand the difference between evidence and proof.  When he says there’s no evidence, what he’s really saying is that there is no proof.  

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticm ... -evidence/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:29 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
Hamblin seems to be getting a little testy:

Quote:
There is clearly evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon. I’ve given a few examples. Jenkins says its not evidence. Why? Because he already knows the Book of Mormon is fiction. Jenkins refuses to read anything by any any LDS scholar. Why? Because they are all cranks and pseudo-scholars. How do we know they are cranks and psuedoscholars? Because they believe in the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

How does he know all this? Because he hasn’t read a damn thing on the topic. And I’m not going to rewrite the entire corpus of Book of Mormon scholarship on my blog for his convenience. He feels justified in steadfastly remaining ignorant of the scholarship on the historicity of the Book of Mormon because he already knows, a priori, that the Book of Mormon is fiction. And since it is fiction, it is a waste of time to read any evidence for it being history. Even if Jenkins is right, and the Book of Mormon is fiction, it is hard to imagine a more toxic combination of utter ignorance, arrogance and contempt in scholarship.


No, he's refusing to wade into the morass of apologetic publications because his simple request for a solid piece of evidence of New World evidence that meets the Daubert standard has gone unanswered. If someone wants me to do some reading about, say, shape-shifting underground reptilians, I need to be shown some plausible evidence that such things exist. Then we can start talking about the minutiae, but as long as no such evidence is forthcoming, I'm not going to spend any time on it. That's the problem Hamblin has here. He complains that Jenkins "won't read a damn thing" about Book of Mormon studies, but he hasn't given Jenkins a single reason to do so.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:48 am 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7500
Location: Cassius University
I'm reminded of the claims in the old Saturday morning advertisements for sugary breakfast cereals: "Super Golden Crisp is part of a nutritious breakfast!" Are these cereals "nutritious"? No--there aren't very many people who would concede that they are. But wait...look. Look at the label: there's vitamin B12, and niacin, and fiber, and vitamins C, D, and K! Clearly, there's evidence that it's nutritious!


Hamblin wrote:
it is hard to imagine a more toxic combination of utter ignorance, arrogance and contempt in scholarship.


Lol.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:08 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
Doctor Scratch wrote:
I'm reminded of the claims in the old Saturday morning advertisements for sugary breakfast cereals: "Super Golden Crisp is part of a nutritious breakfast!" Are these cereals "nutritious"? No--there aren't very many people who would concede that they are. But wait...look. Look at the label: there's vitamin B12, and niacin, and fiber, and vitamins C, D, and K! Clearly, there's evidence that it's nutritious!


Hamblin wrote:
it is hard to imagine a more toxic combination of utter ignorance, arrogance and contempt in scholarship.


Lol.


The man definitely has no sense of irony.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:20 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8212
Location: What does the fox say?
See my sig.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:26 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
SteelHead wrote:
See my sig.


I can't remember where he said that. Do you remember?

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:33 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8212
Location: What does the fox say?
I would have to go find it. Was over at mad board, or maybe the world table. Then again it might be his sig at mad.......

I would have to go look.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:35 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
Don't worry about it. It isn't any less hilarious on its own than it was in context. I just couldn't remember when/where he said it. But I do remember him saying it.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:43 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8212
Location: What does the fox say?
Found it. Bashing Bokovoy.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmaticm ... scripture/

Quote:
.
.
.
.
Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality. We prefer to follow a God who actually intervenes in history, rather than the imaginary Gandalf of Middle Earth. We prefer to follow a God who can reveal his words to his prophets, rather than the imaginary “Force” of Star Wars. We prefer a resurrected Christ to imaginary second-hand accounts of the hallucinations of his distraught disciples. For as Paul noted: “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” (1 Cor. 15:19).
.
.
.


I find this part: "to imaginary second-hand accounts of the hallucinations of his distraught disciples." epsecially ironic.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Last edited by SteelHead on Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:44 am 
God

Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:43 pm
Posts: 13117
honorentheos wrote:
On the other hand - a temple inscription of a tribal name from the correct period with geographical possibility (setting aside how much wider the umbrella for the Lehite party can be cast) of being on the Lehite party's route.


Most members who spout NHM haven't even taken the time to realize NHM it is being used as a tribal name and not a place name.

_________________
42


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Hamblin Accuses Jenkins of Anti-Mormon Prejudice
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:48 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
Themis wrote:
Most members who spout NHM haven't even taken the time to realize NHM it is being used as a tribal name and not a place name.


Hamblin, on the other hand, does know this.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 289 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fence Sitter, Majestic-12 [Bot], thechair and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group