Book of Mormon a Stolen Novel?

[_MCB]

Upper New York State also has rough winters. People holed up and read a lot, including to each other. Mike Quinn did massive research on the bookstores and libraries in the area, and the amount of reading material available was remarkable. Even if Joseph Smith was minimally literate, he had plenty of people around him who were well-read, and able to integrate plots and themes from what they had read into the Book of Mormon. Joseph did not write it by himself. And Dartmouth College was only a few miles away.

[_LittleNipper]

The fringes of America?!? What are you talking about? We are talking about New York state in the early 19th century. New York was not the "fringes" of America.

Have you ever read any James Fenimore Cooper --- Last of the Mohican. etc. Most written from Coopersville NY.

[_Tobin]

The fringes of America?!? What are you talking about? We are talking about New York state in the early 19th century. New York was not the "fringes" of America.

Have you ever read any James Fenimore Cooper --- Last of the Mohican. etc. Most written from Coopersville NY.

Have you ever looked at a map from that period? Here is one of the United States in 1820, just a FYI. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/neh/interactives/sectionalism/lesson1/ You'll note the fringes of America was along the Mississippi. Now, where is New York state?

[_Themis]

This doesn't help your case. Apparently he was able to make copies of one work and send them as far as Hawaii, yet any remnant of the mythical manuscript found evaporated into thin air - never to seen again by anyone - anywhere!

You show your ignorance. The manuscript we do have went missing for a long time and I am not aware of any drafts for it. You assert things you don't know. Your continuous use of the word mythical also state your bias that you would never consider any evidence. This is your problem with LDS issues. You have even stated the evidence doesn't really matter.

And for the umpteenth time, I've seen God, spoke with him and the scriptures are true. IF you wish to know the truth, you have to seek God and speak with God. If you don't, you can just sit around and wait for God to show up. It is as simple as that.

But unlike the missionaries in my example you can't say you have sought God and God showed up.

For the umpteenth time, Joseph Smith didn't know reformed Egyptian and translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God.

And where did Joseph get the idea to attach certain text to certain hieroglyphs in order and how much text each should have? Where did Joesph get the information for the facsimiles? If he didn't have a knowledge of what these hieroglyphs mean ( I agree that he didn't) then where did he get the ideas to do what I listed above? In particular focus on the facsimiles.

Agreed. So much for your theory that God made Joseph Smith do everything perfectly from the get-go.

You already said they were not inspired, so why did God allow them to be used. You are getting into more trouble here.

For the umpteenth time, what evidence? There is NO evidence other than evidence that there is also a Santa Claus and tooth fairy.

If there is none, why did you say you read witness statements and then never showed who you were referring to when asked? While I may be neutral to the theory due to not enough evidence, you know little of the issues so unless you are going to educate yourself more on it, there is much to say. Comparing it to the tooth fairy or Santa Claus is just silly and shows you are not to be taken seriously.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spalding%E2%80%93Rigdon_theory_of_Book_of_Mormon_authorship

[_Themis]

The Book of Mormon is a large story and consistent with the Bible. At least it is the way I interpret the Bible.

I had to laugh when I read your qualifier.

I did not read the Bible around some others opinions I read it on my own way before I read the Book of Mormon.

I don't think any really believe you were isolated from other opinions on the Bible.

[_Tobin]

This doesn't help your case. Apparently he was able to make copies of one work and send them as far as Hawaii, yet any remnant of the mythical manuscript found evaporated into thin air - never to seen again by anyone - anywhere!

You show your ignorance. The manuscript we do have went missing for a long time and I am not aware of any drafts for it. You assert things you don't know. Your continuous use of the word mythical also state your bias that you would never consider any evidence. This is your problem with LDS issues. You have even stated the evidence doesn't really matter.

Again, it doesn't help your case. The only copy we have of a manuscript that was written by Spaulding was found in Hawaii. Based on that evidence, that must be the found manuscript. The witness must be mistaken because there is no evidence of any other manuscript.

And for the umpteenth time, I've seen God, spoke with him and the scriptures are true. IF you wish to know the truth, you have to seek God and speak with God. If you don't, you can just sit around and wait for God to show up. It is as simple as that.

But unlike the missionaries in my example you can't say you have sought God and God showed up.

And if you don't want to know and want to sit around waiting for God to show up, that is your prerogative.

For the umpteenth time, Joseph Smith didn't know reformed Egyptian and translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God.

And where did Joseph get the idea to attach certain text to certain hieroglyphs in order and how much text each should have? Where did Joesph get the information for the facsimiles? If he didn't have a knowledge of what these hieroglyphs mean ( I agree that he didn't) then where did he get the ideas to do what I listed above? In particular focus on the facsimiles.

It was his speculation. He had no idea what they were obviously.

Agreed. So much for your theory that God made Joseph Smith do everything perfectly from the get-go.

You already said they were not inspired, so why did God allow them to be used. You are getting into more trouble here.

Because it wasn't important and he didn't know any better. God uses imperfect men for his purposes and makes them into better men.

For the umpteenth time, what evidence? There is NO evidence other than evidence that there is also a Santa Claus and tooth fairy.

If there is none, why did you say you read witness statements and then never showed who you were referring to when asked? While I may be neutral to the theory due to not enough evidence, you know little of the issues so unless you are going to educate yourself more on it, there is much to say. Comparing it to the tooth fairy or Santa Claus is just silly and shows you are not to be taken seriously.

The theory can't be taken seriously. It is fiction since there is not a shred of corroborated evidence to show this manuscript EVER existed. As far as any reasonable person should be concerned, the only manuscript he wrote was found in Hawaii. End of story.

And don't worry Themis. I can do this all day. You can be as stubborn as you want and disagreeable. I'm going to respond in this thread in exactly the same way to illustrate my point about your behavior.

[_Themis]

Again, it doesn't help your case. The only copy we have of a manuscript that was written by Spaulding was found in Hawaii. Based on that evidence, that must be the found manuscript. The witness must be mistaken because there is no evidence of any other manuscript.

If Joseph and others had used Spalding's manuscript to help create the Book of Mormon would you expect that they would have destroyed it or not?

www.solomonspalding.information/pdf/more_than_1_spalding_ms.pdf

It was his speculation. He had no idea what they were obviously.

This is why Joseph had to very dumb to make it up knowing he couldn't hope to get it right. It does nothing to address the facsimiles since how would this information go from God to Joseph without attaching it to the particular parts of the facsimiles. The explanations are totally dependent on each part of the facsimiles they are attached to.

Because it wasn't important and he didn't know any better. God uses imperfect men for his purposes and makes them into better men.

using the seer stones would not be an imperfection of Joseph. If they are not inspired they should not have worked, since it has to be God to give Joseph revelation through them as we see from historical evidence.

The theory can't be taken seriously. It is fiction since there is not a shred of corroborated evidence to show this manuscript EVER existed. As far as any reasonable person should be concerned, the only manuscript he wrote was found in Hawaii. End of story.

And don't worry Themis. I can do this all day. You can be as stubborn as you want and disagreeable. I'm going to respond in this thread in exactly the same way to illustrate my point about your behavior.

I am aware you can assert all day without backing it up. I see you still haven't provided who these witnesses are you said you read.

[_Franktalk]

Some inconsistances I see concern Nephi and how God handled Labin. The addtion to the Tower of Babel story is out of line with what the Bible reveals. It is like two different authors. Scripture has only one author/editor.

Each story as told in different Books can be different. It depends on the message that one wants to get across. The Bible is no different. Why do we have four Gospels? Don't you think one complete one would have done the trick? The Gospel of Matthew is taken from the view of being Jewish. Luke is from the view of man. And John speaks of the deity of Christ. Mark just fills in some detail. I am glad scripture covers many angles. I don't see it as a bad thing.

[_Tobin]

Again, it doesn't help your case. The only copy we have of a manuscript that was written by Spaulding was found in Hawaii. Based on that evidence, that must be the found manuscript. The witness must be mistaken because there is no evidence of any other manuscript.

If Joseph and others had used Spalding's manuscript to help create the Book of Mormon would you expect that they would have destroyed it or not?

I suspect they wouldn't have kept it around as I suspect if the tooth fairy had wrote it - they would have put the tooth fairy in a box and dropped it in a river. Next you'll be accusing Joseph Smith and SR of fairy abuse I suppose.

It was his speculation. He had no idea what they were obviously.

This is why Joseph had to very dumb to make it up knowing he couldn't hope to get it right. It does nothing to address the facsimiles since how would this information go from God to Joseph without attaching it to the particular parts of the facsimiles. The explanations are totally dependent on each part of the facsimiles they are attached to.

Joseph Smith did and said a number of stupid things. Stupidty doesn't preclude the Lord from trying to work with mankind. He has a very good nature. I try to emulate it by talking with you in fact.

Because it wasn't important and he didn't know any better. God uses imperfect men for his purposes and makes them into better men.

using the seer stones would not be an imperfection of Joseph. If they are not inspired they should not have worked, since it has to be God to give Joseph revelation through them as we see from historical evidence.

He works with imperfect sinful men despite our failings. Nobody said the seer stones worked. They were merely a crutch, an impure practice that Joseph Smith had and used, that he eventually got rid of as he became more familiar with the Lord.

The theory can't be taken seriously. It is fiction since there is not a shred of corroborated evidence to show this manuscript EVER existed. As far as any reasonable person should be concerned, the only manuscript he wrote was found in Hawaii. End of story.

And don't worry Themis. I can do this all day. You can be as stubborn as you want and disagreeable. I'm going to respond in this thread in exactly the same way to illustrate my point about your behavior.

I am aware you can assert all day without backing it up. I see you still haven't provided who these witnesses are you said you read.

Hi kettle calling the pot black. I'm merely behaving just like you to see how much you enjoy talking to yourself. Having fun yet?

[_son of Ishmael]

Some inconsistances I see concern Nephi and how God handled Labin. The addtion to the Tower of Babel story is out of line with what the Bible reveals. It is like two different authors. Scripture has only one author/editor.

Each story as told in different Books can be different. It depends on the message that one wants to get across. The Bible is no different. Why do we have four Gospels? Don't you think one complete one would have done the trick? The Gospel of Matthew is taken from the view of being Jewish. Luke is from the view of man. And John speaks of the deity of Christ. Mark just fills in some detail. I am glad scripture covers many angles. I don't see it as a bad thing.

Actually Mark was the first Gospel written and the rest of them used that version to write theirs.