you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

Do they try to argue there was a miscommunication and that the horses mentioned in the Mormon Bible were actually tapirs? I'm confused

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

    Exactly that. Something called linguistic "loanshifting." It was suggested by a Mormon "scholar" in the 80s and is trotted out from time to time by later apologists. It's a somewhat niche suggestion even among Mormons, but that's because nothing in the Book of Mormon makes any damn sense at all in any field's scholarship without world class mental gymnastics, so most of the rank and file simply choose not to worry about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 21 hours ago (1 child)

    It really is the least believable of bigger religions

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 12 hours ago

    A couple of my favorites: there are literally extant court records of Joseph Smith scamming people before he started the religion, and the "ancient papyrus" he supposedly translated for a side project was utterly invalidated a few years later when the Rosetta stone helped early Egyptologists crack the language.

    Starting a "trust me, bro" religion in an era of scientific advancement and systematic record keeping is certainly one way to go, LOL. Kudos to him and the subsequent leaders for keeping the grift going... I guess.

  • source
  • parent