Latter Day Saints and the Tower of Babel

[_Themis]

We're not going to find any smoking-gun proof that Smith faked the Book of Mormon.

We do with the Book of Abraham. While it worked for him during his life, it probably wasn't a good idea to use something real that scholars would be able to read at some point, but I doubt he was worried about the future. I think he did realize the power of a prop, and the stupidity/gullibility of people. We see today people who know the evidences regarding the Book of Abraham and still believe. Too many people will easily believe some crazy stuff.

[_Physics Guy]

The papyrus we have actually had nothing to do with the text that was revealed to Joseph Smith. That seems to be the normal view of modern Mormons. Just as the golden plates actually had nothing to do with the other text that was revealed to Joseph Smith. In both cases the supposed physical texts were just props that somehow incidentally occasioned a revelation that might just as well have come in a dream.

But I can't help thinking this. Suppose Smith had never even mentioned golden plates, or papyrus. Take away the witness statements from the front of the Book of Mormon, and replace them with a simple sentence, signed by no-one but Joseph Smith: "I saw these words revealed to me on a stone, and I hereby assert that they came from God." Doesn't that just sound lame, in comparison? Aren't you much less impressed? Would you even bother to read any further?

And so I can't help thinking that this is really why the golden plates, and some kind of papyrus original for the Book of Abraham, are so important. They don't actually support Smith's claims to prophethood, since he didn't actually get his texts from them, but they provide a vital distraction from the fact that Smith's claims have no support.

[_Themis]

The papyrus we have actually had nothing to do with the text that was revealed to Joseph Smith. That seems to be the normal view of modern Mormons. Just as the golden plates actually had nothing to do with the other text that was revealed to Joseph Smith. In both cases the supposed physical texts were just props that somehow incidentally occasioned a revelation that might just as well have come in a dream.

That's the apologetic for some, not most. It doesn't fit the evidence of what Joseph was claiming.

But I can't help thinking this. Suppose Smith had never even mentioned golden plates, or papyrus. Take away the witness statements from the front of the Book of Mormon, and replace them with a simple sentence, signed by no-one but Joseph Smith: "I saw these words revealed to me on a stone, and I hereby assert that they came from God." Doesn't that just sound lame, in comparison? Aren't you much less impressed? Would you even bother to read any further?

The props help, and it's what he thought would work, but lots of other religious founders have done it without any props and still able to get a following. I suspect he would still have got his following even if maybe not as many or took longer to get it all going. I suspect the church today might even be a lot bigger if he had avoided these props and making the Book of Mormon.

[_LittleNipper]

The issue at hand: Does the Book of Mormon enlighten the Bible epic; is it an attempt to gain power, prestige, and notoriety by a few individuals; or is a way to try to discredit the sovereignty of the Bible by saying--------------- We, have THIS OTHER revelation which can call into question the validity of the Bible story. I realize that Satan wants to confound, confuse, and divide. It would seem likely that such a being would use anything and everything (including distorted scientific data) to undermine the simplistic Good News of the Bible.

An imaginary being can probably do whatever you imagine, Nipper. Knock yourself out.

But the "distorted scientific data" has allowed the creation of the internet and the computer you're typing on. So you're back to your old dishonest hypocrite shtick. You still can't deal with all of the Christians who practice science and laugh at your "simplistic" fantasies dreamed up by the Morris and Hovind cults. They aren't Christian, Nipper. They're creationist cults of Christianity.

An imaginary being cannot answer prayer. Now God can choose to answer any prayer He wishes ---- even from those who are not Christian (but at His prerogative). Christian Creationists accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. Jesus accepted the Old Testament as God's Word. Scientists who believe that their scientific study will earn them eternal salvation are in for a terrible shock someday.

Edison did not apply evolution to invent the Light bulb, the phonograph, the stock ticker, cement houses, nor the kinetoscope. He applied the principles of engineering and a lot of sweat equity. The reason we have the computer and the Internet, has everything to do with inspiration of men like Bell, Edison, and Tesla without any help from Darwin and his opinion. In fact, Darwin didn't do anything that made anyone's life any easier or understandable. He was at observer (at best) with a vivid imagination.

[_spotlight]

An imaginary being cannot answer prayer. Now God can choose to answer any prayer He wishes ---- even from those who are not Christian (but at His prerogative). Christian Creationists accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. Jesus accepted the Old Testament as God's Word. Scientists who believe that their scientific study will earn them eternal salvation are in for a terrible shock someday.

Edison did not apply evolution to invent the Light bulb, the phonograph, the stock ticker, cement houses, nor the kinetoscope. He applied the principles of engineering and a lot of sweat equity. The reason we have the computer and the Internet, has everything to do with inspiration of men like Bell, Edison, and Tesla without any help from Darwin and his opinion. In fact, Darwin didn't do anything that made anyone's life any easier or understandable. He was at observer (at best) with a vivid imagination.

Thomas Edison was a deist. He believed in a Creator, but beyond that it was only the laws of nature that ruled the world.
http://hollowverse.com/thomas-edison/

Sweat equity?

I think that most scientists are not expecting any kind of continued existence after death Little Nipper. So your superstitious threat doesn't carry much weight. Kind of similar to your not being intimidated by the threats of a Muslim but even more so.

Let's see I can pray over things I wish to accomplish and when a certain percentage of those items get accomplished, voila! - answered prayers! How amazing was that!? Not very Little Nipper. The same result would have occurred with or without the fatuous prayer.

[_Fence Sitter]

The reason we have the computer and the Internet, has everything to do with inspiration of men like Bell, Edison, and Tesla without any help from Darwin and his opinion.

And Einstein.

Bonus points if you can tell us how the age of the universe (14 billion years or so) and Einstein's electrical theories that make your computer function and intertwined.

[_Maksutov]

The reason we have the computer and the Internet, has everything to do with inspiration of men like Bell, Edison, and Tesla without any help from Darwin and his opinion.

And Einstein.

Bonus points if you can tell us how the age of the universe (14 billion years or so) and Einstein's electrical theories that make your computer function and intertwined.

Those scientists were inspired by the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Nipper's Garden Gnome god was the deity for the sheepherders and fishermen. Their technology peaked with the crook and the net.

[_Maksutov]

.

[_Gunnar]

We know from what is left of the ruins of ancient civilizations that ancient builders and engineers were far from stupid. Some of the structures they managed to build astound even modern day builders and engineers. We know that they had a surprisingly good understanding of the strength of the building materials known to them. They had to have been aware of the fact that hills and mountains well known to them were already far, far taller than any tower they could possibly have built on the plains of Babylon out of bricks and bitumen or any other building materials known to them, yet did not come close to touching even their primitive concepts of heaven. I don't think they were stupid enough to think there was any chance that they could have actually built a tower that reached up to heaven.

Certainly God knew there was no way they could have accomplished such a task. So why would He have felt it necessary take any overt action to stop the project (assuming they were stupid enough to begin it in the first place, which is very highly doubtful)? The inevitable and ignominious failure of such a project would have been more than enough to thoroughly discredit and humiliate the backers of it, and would have been more than punishment enough for the fools that promoted it. In fact, divine intervention to stop the project and punish its backers would have been likely to delude the foolish into thinking that the project must have been possible after all, else why would God have felt it necessary to intervene? I can't believe that God would have been stupid enough to think so!

The Tower of Babel myth simply does not make any sense on any level, and certainly would never have been taken seriously by any of the ancients who were actually familiar with or involved in the actual building of ancient structures and monuments. The mere fact that ancient prophets and religious leaders concocted that ridiculous myth is incontrovertible proof that they were neither inspired by God nor knew anything about building large structures and the strength of materials.

[_Physics Guy]

The Tower of Babel myth simply does not make any sense on any level, and certainly would never have been taken seriously by any of the ancients who were actually familiar with or involved in the actual building of ancient structures and monuments. The mere fact that ancient prophets and religious leaders concocted that ridiculous myth is incontrovertible proof that they were neither inspired by God nor knew anything about building large structures and the strength of materials.

Maybe the myth's original hearers knew very well what they themselves could build, but simply imagined a magical prehistoric time in which their ancestors had been able to do much more.

Today we have science fiction. We imagine that our descendants will do things that we cannot imagine. But it's only in the past couple of centuries that technological progress has been so study as to make the future obviously grander than the past. For most of history, things have gone up and down slowly. Or more often, I think: slowly up and quickly down. So imagining a much better time, in the ancient world, probably meant imagining a time in the past.

The Tower of Babel obviously isn't accurate history. It's not even sensible theology. But it's an oddly modern story, if you think about it. Human ambition is conceived of as building, and as reaching the heavens. Human potential is so high, even God is alarmed. But all it takes to destroy that potential is miscommunication. Not speaking each other's languages was considered a tragic weakness, even so long ago. If you take it as a myth, rather than as the history it obviously isn't, the Tower of Babel isn't so uninspired, it seems to me.