Dave... now let's say that you have my letter above in my Baby book, which
states that I was born in Florida, and you also have a letter (also
attached to my Baby book) from the delivering doctor who swears that he
delivered me in Paris.
Now, common sense would tell you that, unless you can find outside
evindence, you must conclude that there is a contradiction in my baby book.
(DAVE 5/2) Yoel: Not necessarily. My mother lived in Paris and always
lived her whole life in Ontario. That is not a contradiction at all. There
is a Paris, Ontario. I would first ensure that the Paris being referred to
was in France and the Florida was in the US. at that point, common sense
would lead me to believe that there was a contradiction. This is where you
guys are misguided in your assertions about Moserath and Mount Hor - you
have made the assumption before finding out where "Paris" really is. You
don't know where Moserath and Mount Hor were yet you're scrambling big-time
to try to justify your assertions of errancy with peripheral arguments.
Yoel
In one instance, I am stating that I was born in Florida, in another, my
Doctor is stating that I was born in Paris. Which is true?
(DAVE 5/2) Yoel: Maybe both. Where is Paris? Where is Florida?
Yoel
It does not
matter whether or not you want so very badly to adore me and my book. There
is an obvious conflict in our statements, both of which appear in the same
book.
(DAVE 5/2) Yoel: Not obvious until we determine where these places are -
is this alluding to Paris, France? Paris, Ontario? Other "Parises"?
Yoel
Now, you can try to cover up for my baby book, and say "Well, how do you
know that there was not a place in Florida called Paris" or vice versa. You
could say (and truthfully so,) "Florida means "flowery" in Spanish, so it
is not saying that Yoel was born in Florida, but rather, he was born in a
place with many flowers.
Dave, you could postulate until you are blue in the face, trying to find
ways to make the contradictory statements true, but until YOU can produce
proof for one of your theories- then the skeptical statement that there is
a contradiction in my Baby book is AT LEAST as valid as your statement that
there is NO CONTRADICTION WHATSOEVER. I would definitely say that the
skeptical statement is more valid than your apologetic statement because it
assumes nothing but a clear reading of the text until further evidence is
sited.
(DAVE 5/2) Yoel: My mother lived in Paris. At the very same time my
mother lived in Ontario. That is a PERFECTLY CLEAR non-contradictory
statement. Please apply what you just said to this and tell me why it is to
be considered contradictory. I suggest you read back to yourself exactly
what you just wrote and you will find it applies more to the errantist here
then to me. You and others must be getting blue in the face by now.
Yoel
Now... unlike my theoretical Baby book, a book presented as an eternally
truthful guide to life by an amniscient and omnipotent deity should be free
from contradictions. And it isn't just because you say it isn't.
(DAVE 5/2) Yoel: I am not saying that there is no contradiction. I am
saying I don't know. It is YOU who is saying there is - I am juist asking
how you know there to be. Please answer the simplest of questions which
Farrell and Ralph are avoiding so much: which statement is wrong: Duet 10 or
Numbers 33 - Aaron died in Moserath or on Mount Hor? Just tell me which
one(s) is wrong, and we then have a contradcition. Seems a simple question.
I have nothing to "defend" until you show that tyhere actually is a
contradiction.
Regards.
Dave.
"If Joseph Smith composed this book, the act was clearly a miracle. Keeping
awake while he did it was, at any rate."
- Mark Twain on the Book of Mormon