Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

[_Dan Vogel]

MCB,

I think this is a critical issue, Dan V. Mormons, with their lack of a sense of humor, have difficulty seeing the difference between those who ridicule it, and those who read it as a parody. Sad, that they have this hypersensitivity. The world would be a lot nicer if there were more loud laughter between the learning.

Sense of humor is not the issue. It’s whether or not the Book of Mormon is being intentionally humorous. I think we all agree Spalding was intentionally humorous, but we differ about how the Book of Mormon should be read. So far, Marg has given as an example the story of Nephi and Laban. However, because the story lacks elements of realism doesn’t mean it was intended to be humorous. I have no problem reading this story as literature; the problem arises when it is passed off as history. But the story has a serious message—“It’s better that one man parish, than a whole nation parish in unbelief.” The story echoes the Bible stories of Isaac’s blessing of Jacob and David and Goliath. At any rate, the claim that the Book of Mormon’s author was trying to be humorous is ludicrous.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Dan P., what have you read on the S/R theory?

It doesn't interest me much, but I've read a fair amount, both pro and con.

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

(I don't believe that you answered my question.)

[_marg]

So Dan what have you read on the S/R theory anything from the pro S/R side of the discussion?

Sorry I see you specified pro and con..so what have you read on the pro side?

[_Daniel Peterson]

So Dan what have you read on the S/R theory anything from the pro S/R side of the discussion?

LOL. I take it that you don't want to answer my simple little question.

I've read Howe's Mormonism Unvailed, Cowdrey et al.'s Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon?, the Jockers study, and a few other assorted things, in whole or in part.

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

[_GlennThigpen]

So Dan what have you read on the S/R theory anything from the pro S/R side of the discussion?

LOL. I take it that you don't want to answer my simple little question.

I've read Howe's Mormonism Unvailed, Cowdrey et al.'s Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon?, the Jockers study, and a few other assorted things, in whole or in part.

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

marge, that is a question that I would like you to answer also. Have you read the Book of Mormon, and incidentally, have you read the Bible?

Thanks,
Glenn

[Guest]

DCP,

I've answered that question in this thread and made comments relating as well in other posts. Yes, I've read it, however the context of biblical Hebrew history and lost tribe myth...I was unaware of at the time. I would need to read it again, to put things said relating to those into context.

Edit: this was my response to you Dan before Glenn had written his post. So "it" refers to the Book of Mormon which is what you asked.

[Guest]

I've answered that question in this thread and made comments relating as well in other posts. Yes, I've read it, however the context of biblical Hebrew history and lost tribe myth...I was unaware of at the time. I would need to read it again, to put things said relating to those into context.

You've read . . . what, exactly?

Sorry. Your answer is ambiguous.

Have you read the Bible? All of it?

Have you read the Book of Mormon? Not in the Book of Mormon. Have you read it?

[_marg]

have you read the Bible?

No Glenn,

[_Daniel Peterson]

Oh well, it seems that I'll have to fly out tomorrow morning for six weeks on the road without knowing whether Marg has read the Book of Mormon or not.

Sigh. I didn't think it was that difficult a question.

[_marg]

But the story has a serious message—“It’s better that one man parish, than a whole nation parish in unbelief.”

That's pretty much the message I kept reading over and over again... that belief in Jesus/divine and God was the all consuming important point one was supposed to be convinced of. Rather than taking it seriously, it came across as tediously humorous to me. by the way, are you using a dictation program and pronouncing it parish as opposed to perish?

The story echoes the Bible stories of Isaac’s blessing of Jacob and David and Goliath. At any rate, the claim that the Book of Mormon’s author was trying to be humorous is ludicrous.

Who is claiming the Book of Mormon author was trying to be humorous? I brought up the Laban story because a conneaut witness had, so I assume if the witness is correct then Spalding had that story in his manuscript. And I could perceive someone thinking that story is unrealistic and finding it humorous..especially if spalding read it with humorous tones and/or facial expressions.

I believe one witness mentioned spalding reading some humorous passages to those present. That witness, Miller mentioned Spalding had a number of manuscripts which he said he perused often. Possibly he was thinking of MSCC when he mentioned humorous but MSCC is not particularly humorous. So I think this is an example of scrutinizing a witness's statement without appreciating there is no opportunity for him to clarify what he meant and what he found humorous. But to say that Spalding couldn't have been used for the Book of Mormon because the Book of Mormon isn't humorous based on one witness mentioning Spalding reading some humorous passages, doesn't take into account what others find humorous. Just the way Spalding read, may have seemed humorous. Perhaps the biblical language when they knew he had written in imitation of the Bible may have made his work seem humorous..at least to Miller.