Other Religious Forgeries

[Lem]

Sorry, evasions have already been thrown out. Or struck out, depending on your preferred sport. The foul has been reviewed:

The one thing you never do is defend the argument itself. When challenged, you fall back on ...anything but actually defending your argument.

---------
Back to the topic:

Let's consider the plight of the Book of Abraham as another example. If God was intent on preserving record on plates, because they are durable, then what happened with the Book of Abraham? Additionally once we consider the content of the papyrus from which the Book of Abraham was purportedly extracted from, we learn there was no Book of Abraham at all. It is most likely, it seems, Smith, if he's forwarding God's word, used the old relic of papyrus to divine thoughts given of God, transported to the poor man's brain. As it turns out, as well, the papyrus date to a couple of millennia after Abraham, making no mention of Abraham. Why should the plates be any different? Maybe they too do not mention anything about Nephi?

If as you say the plates were the best way for God to communicate the Book of Mormon, then why did God fail to follow the best way for the Book of Abraham? And to give back credence to a popular criticism of the whole Joseph translated the plates into English, why is it reported that the plates lay hidden away as he dictated the words that became the Book of Mormon? There doesn't seem to be much reason to think the story of the Book of Mormon is found on the plates anyway. That is plates could have been found and they may have stories etched on them that have no relation to the time and place of what the Book of Mormon claims, but like the ancient papyrus God simply needed them to magically enter the thoughts to Smith to write up the scripture.

And, as I recall from a previous conversation, you seemed intent to define faith as superstition and gullibility, and I had asked what is the great nobility of such a faith? It hardly seems like a virtue, but more of a vice. As I recall I got no response from you, but I remain curious.

The other point here is that the Gold Plates weren't used to communicate the Book of Mormon. A rock found when digging was used.

Exactly. No need to produce plates, its the story of magical things under cloth that allows imagination to kick in. Or, as far more eloquently said,

...At the very least the plates make the whole thing interesting. If there is something that ties the story of the Book of Mormon, as an object, to the past in a plausible way, it is the alleged existence of the plates. As a story, they are compelling stuff. As an artifact, they can only survive as lost plates. Once they are found in a mundane context, they become unremarkable again.

[bolding added to 'alleged,' because the human imagination is boundless.]

[mentalgymnast]

No need to produce plates...

The plates are an artifact. That connection point between the ancient and the modern. For this reason alone I think they are/were necessary. And there are witnesses, not a few, that say/testified that there were plates. I think you’re going to have to live with that.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Exactly. No need to produce plates, its the story of magical things under cloth that allows imagination to kick in. Or, as far more eloquently said,


...At the very least the plates make the whole thing interesting. If there is something that ties the story of the Book of Mormon, as an object, to the past in a plausible way, it is the alleged existence of the plates. As a story, they are compelling stuff. As an artifact, they can only survive as lost plates. Once they are found in a mundane context, they become unremarkable again.

[bolding added to 'alleged,' because the human imagination is boundless.]

The plates are an artifact.

Not one that actually exists.

That connection point between the ancient and the modern.

A connection that has not been affirmed by any actual research.

For this reason alone I think they are/were necessary. And there are witnesses, not a few, that say/testified that there were plates.

Likewise for UFOs, Sasquatch, little green men in Area 51, the Loch Ness Monster, fairies, leprechauns, Ouija board messages, tarot card truths, daily life lessons from one's horoscope, predictions from Nostradamus......, etc. Etc. Etc.

I think you’re going to have to live with that.

"live with that"? You mean, the way I "live with" every other imaginary, fictional, supernatural story in the world? Sure, okay. That Sci Fi section of my library doesn't give me any grief, nor does any other work of fiction, so I think I'll be fine.



I did go back to the topic for a reason, I think ihaq's comment says a lot about the issue:

Back to the topic:

Let's consider the plight of the Book of Abraham as another example. If God was intent on preserving record on plates, because they are durable, then what happened with the Book of Abraham? Additionally once we consider the content of the papyrus from which the Book of Abraham was purportedly extracted from, we learn there was no Book of Abraham at all. It is most likely, it seems, Smith, if he's forwarding God's word, used the old relic of papyrus to divine thoughts given of God, transported to the poor man's brain. As it turns out, as well, the papyrus date to a couple of millennia after Abraham, making no mention of Abraham. Why should the plates be any different? Maybe they too do not mention anything about Nephi?

If as you say the plates were the best way for God to communicate the Book of Mormon, then why did God fail to follow the best way for the Book of Abraham? And to give back credence to a popular criticism of the whole Joseph translated the plates into English, why is it reported that the plates lay hidden away as he dictated the words that became the Book of Mormon? There doesn't seem to be much reason to think the story of the Book of Mormon is found on the plates anyway. That is plates could have been found and they may have stories etched on them that have no relation to the time and place of what the Book of Mormon claims, but like the ancient papyrus God simply needed them to magically enter the thoughts to Smith to write up the scripture.

And, as I recall from a previous conversation, you seemed intent to define faith as superstition and gullibility, and I had asked what is the great nobility of such a faith? It hardly seems like a virtue, but more of a vice. As I recall I got no response from you, but I remain curious.

The other point here is that the Gold Plates weren't used to communicate the Book of Mormon. A rock found when digging was used.

Exactly. No need to produce plates, its the story of magical things under cloth that allows imagination to kick in. I think Smith was savvy enough to realize he could show a rock, but not plates.

[mentalgymnast]

I think Smith was savvy enough to realize he could show a rock, but not plates.

I think you’re ignoring the point that the plates were seen also by a number witnesses. Including Mary Whitmer.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/med ... s?lang=eng

In good conscience what do you do with all these witnesses?

Also, what do you think the ‘back story’ is as to why...if a fraud...Joseph Smith chose plates as the medium to use? Why any medium? Why not go the Mary Baker Eddy route and go to spiritualism to get the message out? Or what about doing a Helen Schucman routine and just have Jesus do a direct message?

The plates were necessary.

Joseph didn’t have a problem with showing the plates, although there were limitations set in place to throw people like yourself for a loop thinking they should have been shown to the world and be availability for perusal in SLC.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

.... set in place to throw people like yourself for a loop....

If there is a God, you turned away from Him a long time ago. I’d be/feel a bit uncomfortable too.

It is pretty refreshing, though, when the real MG peeks out from behind all his smilies and regards and onwards and upwardses and shows his teeth: you should be uncomfortable because my God is going to Screw you up.

[Kishkumen]

I agree that the plates were necessary, but my understanding of what that means is completely different from yours, MG. In the first place, the plates were a treasure sought by a group of treasure diggers. No plates, no treasure, no search. So interest in the Book of Mormon begins as interest in the treasure of the gold plates. That is, in the initial phase, why the idea of plates is necessary.

Secondarily, it was the religio-poetic function of plates as an improved version of the tablets in the Ark of the Covenant. The gold plates in the stone box are the New World equivalent of the Stone Tablets in the Ark. The depth of this line of thinking goes much further and reveals a lot of interesting mythological connections with the Hebrew Bible. Without the plates as an object believed to exist, this would not run very far.

Finally, the plates are an object involved in a process of divination. The diviner starts with certain signs that call for interpretation. Bird behaviors, lightning strikes, tea leaves, indecipherable symbols. The diviner is the one who can interpret the signs with or without the aid of some tool. Those who see the plates as ancillary are only revealing their ignorance of this entire tradition.

The question is not an abstract philosophical one about what a Deity has the power to do or what perfect, divine reason dictates. The question is how the plates and the stone fit the traditions for divine-human communication in their time and place, and then going back into much earlier times. Of course, some personalities have no need for God and no desire for divination. For those who choose otherwise, there is nothing incredibly odd about the Book of Mormon case. It fits the Western religious and cultural tradition very nicely.

[mentalgymnast]

.... set in place to throw people like yourself for a loop....

It is pretty refreshing, though, when the real MG peeks out from behind all his smilies and regards and onwards and upwardses and shows his teeth: you should be uncomfortable because my God is going to Screw you up.

I think that God is more liberal in His views than you might think.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

No plates, no treasure, no search. So interest in the Book of Mormon begins as interest in the treasure of the gold plates. That is, in the initial phase, why the idea of plates is necessary.

An absolutely brutal response, Reverend. The entire foundation of Mormonism rests on there being real treasure. Imagine if Mark Hoffman came to the Church and said he'd received the text of the Salamander letter through a medium? How much would the Church have paid for that?

It's only after the fact that those already bilked become open to watered-down versions of revelation.

After the gimmicks and sideshows that get the new religion going comes the "spiritualizing" of everything away -- at least, that's how it works according to Hugh Nibley. He just failed to provide his own beliefs to his own framework.

[Dr Exiled]

Too bad the product was as mundane as it turned out to be.

A whole lot of folks would disagree with you on that point.

Regards,
MG

Perhaps. But pretty much any text can be revered because of group pressure to conform. The group says the Book of Mormon is this incredible book of scripture so you and "[a] whole lot of folks" think so too. I used to think the Book of Mormon was amazing until I left the group and took a look at it again.

[Lem]

No plates, no treasure, no search. So interest in the Book of Mormon begins as interest in the treasure of the gold plates. That is, in the initial phase, why the idea of plates is necessary.

An absolutely brutal response, Reverend. The entire foundation of Mormonism rests on there being real treasure. Imagine if Mark Hoffman came to the Church and said he'd received the text of the Salamander letter through a medium? How much would the Church have paid for that?

It's only after the fact that those already bilked become open to watered-down versions of revelation.

After the gimmicks and sideshows that get the new religion going comes the "spiritualizing" of everything away -- at least, that's how it works according to Hugh Nibley. He just failed to provide his own beliefs to his own framework.

Fascinating. I can only imagine how my lds family would react if I explained to them that Smith was just following the "traditions for divine-human communication in their time and place." in my 7th generation through all lines TBM family, suggesting that "some personalities have no need for God and no desire for divination" would simply tear them apart. They do not equate the Mormon definition of god with any sort of "divination" traditions engaged in by the rest of the world. They seriously and absolutely consider themselves above all of that sort of nonsense, or "hooey," as BOTH of my grandmothers would say. Now that history has advanced enough to situate Smith in the mileu of what is considered "traditional divine-human communication," I can only imagine how many heads are exploding.

No wonder Nelson wants to distance his church from the word "Mormon." History is bringing far too much weirdness to light.