If plates then God

[tagriffy]

The reason I didn't think much of Hale's essay is the very evidence he used could just as surely point to Joseph having the ability to do it. And he lost me completely when he used Emma's "not able to write a coherent letter" statement. As I've pointed out before, Joseph certainly did have the ability in that time period to write a coherent letter. Hales is almost certainly aware of this, but suppressed that information. That's a thread that when pulled could unravel the entire essay.

The coherent letter you referred to in no way represents the skill and acumen that would be necessary to write a complex work such as the Book of Mormon. The Hales essay gives MANY references, some of them from folks unfriendly to Joseph, that testified of his lacking the ability in regards to writing and composition abilities.

It is true enough the coherent letter I referred to does not represent the skill necessary to write the Book of Mormon. But then again, I never said it did. What I said is the fact that Hales suppressed the informaiton that Joseph could indeed write a coherent letter at the time is a thread that could unravel the entire essay. It shows Hales is making dishonest use of at least one source, and that raises the question of where else is he cheating?

One thing I found interesting is that many of the sources actually grant Joseph enough intelligence and talent, but then have to find some way to work around it. That actually winds up pointing to another weakness of Hales' essay. Hales failed to account for the fact that both sides agendas to defend, and it just so happens that the agendas of both sides required minimizing Joseph's abilities.

I would assume you have read through this essay:

https://interpreterfoundation.org/estim ... vidence-1/

I’m not convinced by what folks here have said in regards to my contention that Joseph’s inability to write the Book of Mormon is intertwined with visionary experiences and divine help in the translation process.

Regards,
MG

I've skimmed the essay and have already posted my thoughts about it.

[Marcus]

...What I said is the fact that Hales suppressed the informaiton that Joseph could indeed write a coherent letter at the time is a thread that could unravel the entire essay. It shows Hales is making dishonest use of at least one source, and that raises the question of where else is he cheating?

Excellent point. That was exactly my issue with this section by Hales:

Telling Stories to Family in 1823

Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph’s mother, describes his storytelling inclinations around 1823 when he was in his seventeenth year:

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them."62

If Joseph’s stories originated in his imagination, this recollection is evidence of his creativity as a youth. They include references to the “ancient inhabitants of this continent,” including “their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode,” details not included in the narrative of the Book of Mormon.

he stops at "animals upon which they rode;" but leaves out "their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship." That entire missing phrase covers elements from the Book of Mormon that are addressed extensively throughout the telling.

For Hales to simply leave all of that out, and define only the first half as elements not in the narrative, as though that proves Smith's storytelling isn't applicable to the creation of the Book of Mormon, is disingenuous at best. In my opinion, it is a dishonesty that the Interpreter peer review should have addressed in editing, but it is no surprise they didn't.

[MG 2.0]

Not to nit pick or question Vogel’s historian chops but I’m curious…what’s his day job? What part of his income is dependent on selling books to a certain audience? Mostly, I would guess, to critics and/or others that have a bias against the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith.

I, like you, like to ‘follow the money’.

Kyler Rasmussen’s day job is working as a policy analyst for the Government of Alberta.

https://interpreterfoundation.org/author/kylerr/

Or program planner. One or both of the two.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kyler-Rasmussen

I don’t know if he gets paid for his interest in Mormon Studies and his publications:

https://interpreterfoundation.org/autho ... or/kylerr/

Vogel has been hawking his books for many years. One might reasonably ask if this is or isn’t his sole source of income.

Probably not…but just curious.

Regards,
MG

The ad hominem aside…

I am failing to see where there is an ad hominem. I’m simply asking whether or not Vogel has a day job and/or if writing books promoting the ‘pious fraud’ theory of Joseph Smith are an integral and/or important part of his income. Others here like to follow the money trail in certain instances. I think it’s a reasonable question to ask in regards to Vogel. Rasmussen writes because of his interests in Mormon Studies. He has a day job.

…it doesn't really matter what Rasmussen's credentials are or how he makes his living. The fact remains his argument is bunk.

I think he brings up some important points to consider. In a nutshell, what might we reasonably expect from Joseph Smith at the time/age/place in which the Book of Mormon came forth.

…there is already plenty of scholarship demonstrating Joseph Smith’s authorship and where he could have gotten his information, those who embrace IFT already have a strong position to work from.

There is also the opposing point of view that Joseph couldn’t have done it on his own. Hales and Rasmussen along with others have given pause to question whether Joseph was sole author.

As Rasmussen already notes, the only viable alternatives are a) Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon or b) the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text.

It does come down to that.

Since there is no credible physical evidence the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text, that leaves Joseph's authorship the only viable theory. So even assuming all Rasmussen's calculations are correct, and no matter how high the odds are against it, Joseph's authorship is the most likely theory.

That’s an interesting statement.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I think Mr. Occam might disagree with you.

Care to be a bit more explicit?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

It’s a big leap to Angels, gold plates and visions.

Not if you accept that there is a creator God.

Otherwise, yeah, it would be a HUGE leap.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

It is true enough the coherent letter I referred to does not represent the skill necessary to write the Book of Mormon.

So we are back to square one as to how Joseph did it.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I've skimmed [Rassmussen’s] essay and have already posted my thoughts about it.

All I remember is you saying it was “bunk”.

I’m assuming you think the same about the follow up essay by Hales that I linked to.

But then again you’ve said that it really doesn’t matter how much evidence there is that Joseph couldn’t have written the Book of Mormon on his own. Your position is that he did anyway, or at least that’s the most likely possibility.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

...What I said is the fact that Hales suppressed the informaiton that Joseph could indeed write a coherent letter at the time is a thread that could unravel the entire essay. It shows Hales is making dishonest use of at least one source, and that raises the question of where else is he cheating?

Excellent point. That was exactly my issue with this section by Hales:

Telling Stories to Family in 1823

Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph’s mother, describes his storytelling inclinations around 1823 when he was in his seventeenth year:

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them."62

If Joseph’s stories originated in his imagination, this recollection is evidence of his creativity as a youth. They include references to the “ancient inhabitants of this continent,” including “their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode,” details not included in the narrative of the Book of Mormon.

he stops at "animals upon which they rode;" but leaves out "their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship." That entire missing phrase covers elements from the Book of Mormon that are addressed extensively throughout the telling.

For Hales to simply leave all of that out, and define only the first half as elements not in the narrative, as though that proves Smith's storytelling isn't applicable to the creation of the Book of Mormon, is disingenuous at best. In my opinion, it is a dishonesty that the Interpreter peer review should have addressed in editing, but it is no surprise they didn't.

If I’m not mistaken Joseph’s tales of ancient inhabitants were told during the time he was receiving visits from the angel Moroni.

Would there be a connection there?

Regards,
MG

[Physics Guy]

Did Smith ever say there was?

[MG 2.0]

Did Smith ever say there was?

I don’t know the answer except to say that the visits of Moroni parallel the time span in which Joseph regaled his family with stories of the ancient inhabitants of America. If so, it would make sense that he would share ‘scripture stories’ with them.

Regards,
MG