The Book of Mormon is Scripture

The topic of debate is whether or not the Book of Mormon is "scripture". My arguments are not ad-hominem, nor are they subjective, rather in response to your premise. Indeed Mormons do have temples as places of worship... "Also, if you're going to base your entire opinion of the church on your deliberate confusion of a possibly new missionary, I doubt there's anything anyone can do to change your mind at all." -Again, my arguments are directed at and about the topic at hand. Your attempts at making this a personal issue will not detract the readers from seeing the clear picture I framed in my arguments. "Their nationality was, respectively, Nephite and Lamanite." -As I pointed out in my last argument, neither culture exists according to accepted science, and it is your burden to prove they do if you are going to make claims that rely on this possibility. Furthermore you fail to prove why anyone who believes in the God of Abraham should accept these men as prophets. fic.tion-a. An imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. b. The act of inventing such a creation or pretense. "Also, I challenge you to find a comic book written by a child. Poor metaphor, in my opinion." -I already explained my comic book reference, and my reference to The Book of Mormon being written by a child was a reference to the fact that Joseph Smith was 14 when he began writing it, and 18 when he finished- indeed a child. I mentioned his being a child so as to allude to the fact that most of the teachings contained within the Book of Mormon can be rather childish when compared to accepted science AND scripture. "As to Moroni, we believe that certain beings, when dead, were soon resurrected to become messengers of God. Thus, they are not dead." -This is not accepted theology amongst Abrahamic religions. Among these religions, angels, seraphs, and cherubs are beings created by God, and according to Hebrew belong to the order of "elohim" which are not resurrected humans. Abrahamic theology in general accepts that resurrected humans are transformed, and posses "exalted" forms of their physical bodies, but nowhere in scripture are resurrected humans referred to as angels. Furthermore, you fail to address the issue with his being as a "messenger of revelation", when Abrahamic religions generally apply that role to Gabriel. Another issue you fail to address is the etymology of his name. Gabriel, Michael, and other angels mentioned by name have an etymological link to the word used for God (el) through the Hebrew language. Moroni would be the first angel in religious history to have a name unassociated to God etymologically (even prophets have etymological links to God through their names)... "The fact that scholars don't believe in a language that was changed over many years on a different continent from the one it originated does not surprise me." -It should surprise you because the people you claim spoke that language weren't of the race of people that spoke that language in the first place. There is no remnant of that language in the Americas, and only the claims of Joseph Smith that it ever existed. He couldn't provide any texts, or etymological links in "reformed Egyptian" to any historically Egyptian or Semitic language. No ancient peoples of the Americas have named their civilizations through any etymological link to ancient Egyptian (which, given the dates Joseph Smith claims it was spoken, would include variations of "reformed Egyptian"). No such traces of the language exist ANYWHERE in the Americas. Apparently you haven't read the Book of Mormon. The claims in this book are #1- that these "separate cultures from a different continent" were descendants of Israel. That would mean they were Hebrew by ethnicity, and Jewish by religion. There would be SOME remnant of that culture amongst the four cultures mentioned in the Book of Mormon, especially if they claim such a link that they even cared to mention it. We are not talking tens of thousands of years ago, rather 2500 or so... I can tell you stories, and even speak to you using words from people who lived in my geographical home 2500 years ago... why would this language spoken by 4 great nations that were technologically advanced enough to cross the Atlantic and is a continuation of the language of another great civilization be completely wiped off the planet??? "Furthermore, science once disagreed with it because Nephi used a steel bow and they said they didn't have steel..." -They who? What are you talking about? Can we get some reference or are you just going to throw out unfounded arguments??? Do you know what you're talking about? Do you really want to get into metallurgy??? " In actuality, it was the Urim and Thummim, a breastplate and bow, I think." -You think, but they are also referred to as "seer" stones. "You're dumping all this junk on me, but not lending any real credit to your sources." -Are we going to play this game? The only claims I've made are of your lack of evidence, and the lack of evidence on any of the points I brought up about the Book of Mormon, hence attacking your argument that it is "scripture". As the arguer for pro, you have the burden of proof. I have made no claims that would need proving would you provide any evidence supporting your premise in the first place. Indeed I made arguments that are mostly based on second grades science, and I don't think our audience is that ignorant to common knowledge. When you issue a proper challenge to my arguments by providing some kind of proof supporting your premise, then we can have a debate. As of yet you have made absolutely no claims supporting your premise. "The Nephites died out, if you recall. Same with the Jaredites." -As I pointed out, there would be some sort of genetic connection or some remnant of their DNA amongst the American Indians. Indeed it is the Church of LDS that claims these civilizations were the fore bearers of the Native Americans. "I'm shocked that you're making such an error..." -Try to stay unemotional. I have made no personal attacks against you, rather have remained purely focused on your premise. Am I supposed to not say anything in defense of my position in a debate??? "You claim the Lamanites are descendants of africans? Read it again, because they're descendants of Lemuel, Laman, and the daughters of Ishmael." -You're mixing science with fantasy. I gave you the science- the reference made to Lamanites regarding their racial characteristics are supportive of a reference to descendants of Africans, not Israelites (or Ishmaelites for that matter). In context this statement is part of a broader statement placing the position of the Book of Mormon in doubt with regard to the existence of Lamanites in the first place. "You say that Judaism and Christianity reference recognizable features?" -Yes, and I mentioned some. "Have you considered the fact that all of our history is from basically the same view point as them?" -My reference is not in support of the divinity of Judaic and Christian scripture, rather in reference to the (at least some) accuracies in their historical content. The Book of Mormon provides almost no historical content. Historical claims made in the Talmud, Bible, and Qur'an can be compared to and verified amongst the writings of other cultures (indeed these even refer to each other). The Babylonians, Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, etc. all wrote about the Hebrews, Christians, and vice versa. "The peoples in the Book of Mormon left no record except for it, and the Lamanites didn't keep any records, being less technological and more tribal." -So they conveniently become "less technologically advanced" once they cross the Atlantic on boats??? They write in "reformed Egyptian", forge golden tablets, wage wars, and leave no physical, written, or DNA record? How convenient..