Quote:
Originally Posted by IAmGamerFun
I'm pretty sure that Jesus wasn't born in a city. I'm pretty sure he was born in a manger in the countryside. It was possible that the area that Jesus was born was Jerusalem territory during the writing of the Book of Mormon but was changed to be Bethlehem territory.
|
Dear GamerFun,
The game is over. This rationalization is what we call an
ad hoc escape. It is a
fallacy. Without any other immediate way out of your dilemma, you just
dismiss it, and, as a result, either you or one of those responsible for your indoctrination have come up with an idea "that it would be possible".
This is not enough.
We should apply
Bayesian probability to this. What is the
prior probability of municipalities changing their names or city authorities this way between 40 BC - 0 AD? Can you provide us with some
figures? It is also an
ad hoc, because it is a simple claim ("it is possible") but you fail to even consider other hypotheses, one which, and, in fact, much
more plausible in its prior probability, is the one that Mr. Smith simply
invented all this.
We have, as it happens, loads of
fictional "sacred texts", much more than the one that is True™. For instance, we have the Popol Vuh, the
Tao de ching,
The Urantia,
Dianetics, the
Loose Cannon,
etc. Thus, the prior probability of your "sacred book" being an
elaborate construction without factual base is much
higher than the "possibility of municipalities changing authority". Are you willing to consider this hypotheses,
i.e., is your claim
falsifiable?
Furthermore, if we look at the
actual evidence that is admittedly scarce, we find that
Bethlehem was a City by its own right as early as during the Temple period (600-700 BC). Even the name is mentioned (בת לחם). Of course, it is also in the
Old Testament that was finished long before the alleged date for your Book of Mormon.
Genesis 35:19
And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem.
By all means, you can just decide that a distant possibility invented on the spot is "evidence", but apparently you are also trying to convince
others. To attain that, you must do a better job, I'm afraid. The goes for the
other discrepancies mentioned in Brother Pim's educated post. Don't forget to test your escape explanations against prior probability.
And, please, learn about the
actual history of your religion. The
Mountains Meadows Massacre is a good place to begin.
Yours in Christ,
Elmer