O Livro de Mórmon/Testemunhas/Foram as testemunhas não "empírico" ou homens "racionais"

Índice

Were the witnesses not "empirical" or "rational" men because they lived in the 19th-Century?

  NEEDS TRANSLATION  

Perguntas

Were the Book of Mormon witnesses not "empirical" or "rational" because they lived in the 19th-Century during a time when "folk magic" was practiced?

• One critic of Mormonism claims "The mistake that is made by 21st century Mormons is that they’re seeing the Book of Mormon Witnesses as empirical, rational, twenty-first century men"

Conclusão

Question: What is "empirical evidence"?
Answer: It is evidence based upon observation

Latter-day Saints do not view the Book of Mormon witnesses as "empirical, rational, twenty-first century men." They view them as honest, rational, nineteenth-century men.

Merriam-Webster defines empirical as: "originating in or based on observation or experience." The witnesses testified that they saw the plates, and three of them testified that they saw an angel. This is the very definition of "empirical evidence." They reported what they saw with their own eyes. This is not faith, but knowledge.

To imply that these nineteenth-century men were not empirical or rational because they believed in things that the author considers absurd is a broad generalization of anyone living in the nineteenth century.

Question: Is a man unreliable because he lived in the 19th-Century?
Answer: No. Such an accusation is a ad hominem attack.

To imply that nineteenth-century men are intrinsically unreliable is both an ad hominem (an attack against the character of person making the claim, rather than the claim itself) and sets an impossible standard of evidence for the gospel inasmuch as they were the only men available as witnesses at the time. Thus the author is using a screening argument (dates of life) that can be used to exclude whatever evidence he wishes to ignore.