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

[_GlennThigpen]

marge, you did not get my point. There is no secular history corroborating the existence and the exile of the lost tribes. It is Biblical history. And a religious connotation. There is no history for those tribes outside the Bible. The verse from 2 Esdras is what has fueled the speculation about those tribes migrating to the Americas.

I have a history book it mentions lost tribes...why.. because the tribes exiled in 720 from N. Israel became known as the lost tribes. That's not only biblical history. One can refer to the lost tribes...and it refer to the tribes exiled. That's irrespective of religion.

marge, does it mention those lost tribes as a fact or a myth? I have not read a history book lately, but the ones I remember reading did not take the lost tribes bit seriously. They referenced the story in the Old Testament and the legends that have arisen among the Christians over the centuries.
However, they pointed out that there is no secular documents, except a few that are dispted as to authenticity, that even allude to the lost tribes.

Glenn

[_GlennThigpen]

Was Lake remembering that story or not. Was god in that story or not?

Lake was remembering the TRAGIC death of Laban. That story was about a justified murder-- at least in the minds of the authors, who used the framework of Judith. The actual seminal story was about Eric the Red, who killed a man because of some silly, to our minds-- family Norse religious heirlooms. God was not in that story-- at least, not our god.

Lake was remembering the tragic death of Laban(ko) from the Oberlin manuscript. It did not have God in it and there was a villain.

Glenn

[_marg]

Was Lake remembering that story or not. Was god in that story or not?

Lake was remembering the TRAGIC death of Laban. That story was about a justified murder-- at least in the minds of the authors, who used the framework of Judith. The actual seminal story was about Eric the Red, who killed a man because of some silly, to our minds-- family Norse religious heirlooms. God was not in that story-- at least, not our god.

MCB ..if one is going to write a story and have the good guy kill a person intentionally...whoever the good guy kills is likely going to be portrayed as a bad guy to justify the good guy's behavior. That's standard stuff. It's in movies and stories all the time.

The question I'm asking is Lake recalls this story in Spalding's book..how would Spalding portray this story without a God. Does Nephi simply finds Laban drunk..chops off his head etc and steals some genealogy records? Why wouldn't Lake comment no god was part of the story if that was the case. And why is Spalding's character so intent on stealing genealogy records if that was the case..what is so important about those records without a God? I realize it would just be guess work on your part, but I'm wondering how you perceive Spalding's work absent religion/God.

[_MCB]

What was a logical inconsistency in the death of Labanko that was not fixed?

And what about that same inconsistency being illustrated in Helaman 9:31-37? And prophesied by the wise Nephi?

Back then, everything was permeated with religion, so that relative lack or very oblique reference was regarded as not religious.

[_marg]

[

marge, does it mention those lost tribes as a fact or a myth? I have not read a history book lately, but the ones I remember reading did not take the lost tribes bit seriously. They referenced the story in the Old Testament and the legends that have arisen among the Christians over the centuries.
However, they pointed out that there is no secular documents, except a few that are dispted as to authenticity, that even allude to the lost tribes.

P 304 The World's History by Howard Spodek (2001)

"First the northern kingdom of Israel was exiled by Sennacherib of Assyria in 721 BCE. These exiles drifted into assimilation and were subsequently referred to as the "Ten Lost Tribes"."

This book says were it gets its history from. P 294 Our knowledge of early Jewish history comes from the scriptures known collectively as the Tanakh: Torah (the Five book so Moses), the Neviim, (the books of the prophets), and the Ketuvim.

[_Dan Vogel]

Marg,

think that's pretty standard fare for religious stories, that the ends justify the means.

Yes, but the story of Nephi and Laban is especially designed to justify deception and crossing moral lines, something Spalding would not be worried about. There are other instances of this in Joseph Smith’s revelations.

It still gets back to perspective and context, that although to some people that story might have deep meaning and viewed in a religious context, or it's authors of the Book of Mormon intended it to be such it doesn't need to be viewed in the same context by all. And a writer wanting to show the ridiculousness of similar biblical stories might have used such a story to illustrate that.

You simultaneously argue: (1) the Book of Mormon isn’t intended to be humorous, but (2) some people can read it as humorous, and (3) Spalding could have intended it as humorous. We have already established that skeptics can find the implausibility of the story humorous, but that is to miss the point in miracle stories. Nevertheless, according to the witnesses, Spalding didn’t write about God, and you can’t take God out of this story.

Laban really had no choice, Nephi was going to take those records no matter what. With a God involved things are worse, because a God in theory should be able to figure out better ways of doing things.

You can’t be serious. This kind of thinking opens the door to whatever you imagine God to be like, and what he would or would not do. No one knows the answer to this assertion.

So you think he started out with pious motives..because that fits with your Smith alone pious fraud theory. I can appreciate that, I just think you are wrong. I don't think he planned it out, I think the opportunity presented itself.

Well, he first told his family about the plates in 1823. Joseph Smith told his family in 1824 that he couldn’t get the plates because he was to proceed to the hill with his brother Alvin, who had died in Nov. 1823 just after the first visit. So Joseph Smith had about six years to think about the content of his book. Meanwhile, he was telling stories about the ancient inhabitants of America to his family. This was long before Cowdery, Rigdon, or Pratt came on the scene. It was also about the time your Joseph Smith was a passable Methodist exhorter. My reading of Joseph Smith’s motives comes from the Book of Mormon and his early revelations.

After following the case in B.C. regarding polygamy in which the men exchange young girls with each other in which families offer their young daughters to the prophet..that's when it occurred to me that Smith realized young women could be had, simply by taking the daughters of others produced. And all it takes is 12 - 14 years time and there is another batch of young women for the men to trade amongst themselves. Why use prostitutes when they can be bred.

“B.C.”? I don’t believe this thinking relates to Joseph Smith. I believe he had trouble with monogamy and searched Christian tradition for a way of justifying his needs. I might say that he had trouble living within the rules, so he changed the rules. Debate about Christian polygamy and concubinage goes back to the Reformation.

[_GlennThigpen]

[

marge, does it mention those lost tribes as a fact or a myth? I have not read a history book lately, but the ones I remember reading did not take the lost tribes bit seriously. They referenced the story in the Old Testament and the legends that have arisen among the Christians over the centuries.
However, they pointed out that there is no secular documents, except a few that are dispted as to authenticity, that even allude to the lost tribes.

P 304 The World's History by Howard Spodek (2001)

"First the northern kingdom of Israel was exiled by Sennacherib of Assyria in 721 BCE. These exiles drifted into assimilation and were subsequently referred to as the "Ten Lost Tribes"."

This book says were it gets its history from. P 294 Our knowledge of early Jewish history comes from the scriptures known collectively as the Tanakh: Torah (the Five book so Moses), the Neviim, (the books of the prophets), and the Ketuvim.

And that was my point. Secular history books get their information from the Bible.
The Bible story of the exile of those ten tribes is a religion based one. That conquest by Assyria and exile were allowed because of the wickedness of those people.


Glenn

[_marg]

And that was my point. Secular history books get their information from the Bible.
The Bible story of the exile of those ten tribes is a religion based one. That conquest by Assyria and exile were allowed because of the wickedness of those people.

Allowed by who Glenn?

[_marg]

You simultaneously argue: (1) the Book of Mormon isn’t intended to be humorous, but (2) some people can read it as humorous, and (3) Spalding could have intended it as humorous. We have already established that skeptics can find the implausibility of the story humorous, but that is to miss the point in miracle stories. Nevertheless, according to the witnesses, Spalding didn’t write about God, and you can’t take God out of this story.

You say: We have already established that skeptics can find the implausibility of the story humorous, but that is to miss the point in miracle stories.

I don't follow your point. Monty Python's The Life of Brian is a satire on the Jesus Christ miracle myth. What point are the skeptics who find humor in the movie...missing? And what is wrong with doing so?

You say: "Nevertheless, according to the witnesses, Spalding didn’t write about God, and you can’t take God out of this story."

Well Spalding has religion and God in the MSCC story though God isn't a contributing character. So God can be in the story. I wonder if the witnesses meant by the word "religion" any excerpts taken from the Bible and the Jesus myth being changed by him going to america or did they also mean God as a participating character. And yes I have difficulty understanding how God can be taken out of the Laban story which Lake recalled.

Laban really had no choice, Nephi was going to take those records no matter what. With a God involved things are worse, because a God in theory should be able to figure out better ways of doing things.

You can’t be serious. This kind of thinking opens the door to whatever you imagine God to be like, and what he would or would not do. No one knows the answer to this assertion.

I'm very serious, the story portrays a very inefficient, ineffective God, not the least bit all powerful. That's why I've been telling you I'm not impressed with the ethics in it. Yes I appreciate from a believer's point of view they don't see it like I do..because they are blind and unable to criticize the God character. To a religious individual that character truly exist, it doesn't to me. Just like Glenn above in a post, figures God really participated in exiling the N. Israelites in 720 B.C.

Well, he first told his family about the plates in 1823. Joseph Smith told his family in 1824 that he couldn’t get the plates because he was to proceed to the hill with his brother Alvin, who had died in Nov. 1823 just after the first visit. So Joseph Smith had about six years to think about the content of his book. Meanwhile, he was telling stories about the ancient inhabitants of America to his family. This was long before Cowdery, Rigdon, or Pratt came on the scene. It was also about the time your Joseph Smith was a passable Methodist exhorter. My reading of Joseph Smith’s motives comes from the Book of Mormon and his early revelations.

Who and when was all this information being documented. Who outside the smith family documented when he first told the family about the plates and when was this information relayed to others outside the family?

Do you really think in 1823...there were plates that Smith had to get and if so, who made those plates? And why did they have to go to a hill to get them?

In those 6 years that Smith was thinking about the Book of Mormon did anyone ever note him write anything down in preparation, any notes made etc?

How often did Smith read the Bible, how familiar was he with its content, the history of the Hebrews? How do you know what his knowledge was?

You say: Joseph Smith was a passable Methodist exhorter

By whose opinion? And doesn't this simply indicate he was a good seller, that it doesn't indicate any knowledge of the Bible?

After following the case in B.C. regarding polygamy in which the men exchange young girls with each other in which families offer their young daughters to the prophet..that's when it occurred to me that Smith realized young women could be had, simply by taking the daughters of others produced. And all it takes is 12 - 14 years time and there is another batch of young women for the men to trade amongst themselves. Why use prostitutes when they can be bred.

“B.C.”? I don’t believe this thinking relates to Joseph Smith. I believe he had trouble with monogamy and searched Christian tradition for a way of justifying his needs. I might say that he had trouble living within the rules, so he changed the rules. Debate about Christian polygamy and concubinage goes back to the Reformation.

Dan, I'm not judging. I'm stating things matter of factly. And yes, the practice in the community of B.C. is very much to do with Smith's polygamy that he started and encouraged the other men to practice. Because their attitude in the B.C. community and the way they practice it, exchanging young girls with each other, treating them like one would breed cows..in some cases treating them as slaves..is exactly what was practiced by B.Y.

You are the one attempting to justify..."he had trouble with monogamy".. what difference does that make? Men who have trouble with monogamy seek sex outside of marriage be it prostitute, concubines or other women available. But it's quite convenient to instead breed them..isn't it? Or to ask other men for their daughters and wives until the breeding gets going for future stock?

Yes he changed the rules..his idea of polygamy was to use women for sex and encouraged men in a polygamous system meant to breed more females to supply all the men in the upper hierarchy with lots of females for sexual use, slaves and breeding of more females. After 12 - 14 years once the system is started these men can have a yearly batch of females to exchange with one another and a constant supply into their old age.

And the point being this behavior indicated he was an opportunist using his authority for self interest, not the interest of religion or as a pious fraud.

by the way, I have your book so if there are any pages you'd like me to read just list them. Not the whole book at this point in time though.

[_MCB]

And doesn't this simply indicate he was a good seller, that it doesn't indicate any knowledge of the Bible?

Joseph was home-schooled at several points in his life. The Bible was just about the only text they had for this effort.

Joseph legitimized polygamy to justify his adultery. If he were an adulterer, he couldn't be a religious leader. He started out as a religious leader, but he wanted his sin, too.