Pergunta: Um homem não é considerado de confiança só porque ele viveu no século 19?

Revisão em 22h55min de 25 de dezembro de 2015 por RogerNicholson (Discussão | contribs) (Criou a página com "{{fonte |título=Pergunta: Um homem não é considerado de confiança só porque ele viveu no século 19? |categoria= }} <onlyinclude> ==Pergunta: Um homem não é considera...")
(dif) ← Revisão anterior | Revisão atual (dif) | Revisão seguinte → (dif)

Índice

Pergunta: Um homem não é considerado de confiança só porque ele viveu no século 19?

To imply that someone is unreliable simply because of the era they lived in is a ad hominem attack

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" (The claim was modified to read "nineteenth-century men" in later revisions)[1]

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.

Predefinição:Endnotes sources
  1. Jeremy Runnells, "Letter to a CES Director" (original version posted on the critical website "FutureMissionary.com") (2013)