Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[huckelberry]

In honor of M.G.'s memory, I just watched the entire video.

There is nothing new at all. However, it's interesting to watch Jacob publicly lie and squirm when asked about written Hebrew being found in America. Watch this part for about 30 seconds: https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=4735

If you watch this clip for about 3 minutes, it sets forth all of Jacob's evidences for the divinity of the Book of Mormon (Nahom, Bountiful, Witnesses, how could a farm boy write a 500 page book, the positive effect the Book of Mormon has in people's lives): https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=286

Jacob also brings up Lidar a couple of times when asked why haven't any of the Book of Mormon cities been found. Apparently, Lidar is the answer because new cities are being found every day in Meso-America. It's just a matter of time folks. Keep paying your tithing and obey.

Thanks Everybody Wang Chung for making on point observations on the actual subject.I followed your first link and listened for a while(I had previously followed portions of the debate without hearing much different) I thought the Catholic fellow made some interesting observations about fitting all of the language of the Book of Mormon on the reported plates. It appears there is well short of enough room unless single glifs could represent 40 or more words. Hansen thought an expansion theory of translation might work. Bit of a stretch and not a comfortable one.

After that point there was discussion of other people like Native Americans living among the Nephite settlers. That discussion circled a we do not know what was intended by the book. Old fashioned people liked to speak of them selves and everybody else as generic others. I do not believe that fits Old Testament discussions of other people.

I think the simple observation,implied here, that the Book of Mormon does not have the presence of Natives that would figure in a real history is important. I realize that Mormons have moved away from the idea of land kept separate to be inhabited by the people from Judea. I have heard people point out that the population numbers spoken of exceed expected population growth. I think people arriving by boat would be presented with serious problems establishing relationships with the natives and those would figure large in the story.

[MG 2.0]

So, you had to randomly scroll through a debate you "already listened to", to find a talking point. I put "already listened to" in quotes, because it's absolutely clear you didn't.

What do YOU think about the point being made in regards to Joseph seemingly not having any firm idea about Book of Mormon geography all the way up through the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon. And then ten years later he has access to information that wasn’t available to him before that confirms to him that there might be a real world Book of Mormon geography.

He wasn’t even expecting that this might happen. Yet out of the blue, proof of the types of things the Book of Mormon was describing within its pages when published years before and critics were making fun of it because it didn’t describe the Indians THEY were familiar with.

Interesting, huh?

Brought up in Hansen’s video along with a lot of other stuff.

Watch it, you might learn something.

Regards,
MG

Some more to add:

The works of Stephens and Catherwood also provided Latter-day Saints with an effective rebuttal to a common reason for dismissing the Book of Mormon. That book tells of a people who had a sophisticated pre-Columbian culture, were literate, skilled in art (see Helaman 12:2), built temples (see 2 Nephi 5:16; Mosiah 1:18; Alma 16:13; 26:29; 3 Nephi 11:1), palaces (see Mosiah 11:9; Alma 22:2), and many large and populous cities (see Mosiah 27:6; Ether 13:5). This ran counter to one image of native American people that was common in the early nineteenth century. The biographer of John Lloyd Stephens notes, “The acceptance of an ‘Indian civilization’ demanded, to an American living in 1839, an entire reorientation, for him an Indian was one of those barbaric, half-naked tepee-dwellers against whom wars were constantly waged. A rude, subhuman people who hunted with the stealth of animals, they were artisans of buffalo robes, arrowheads, spears, and little else. Nor did one think of calling the other indigenous inhabitants of the continent ‘civilized.’”

https://rsc.BYU.edu/approaching-antiqui ... ook-Mormon

This exploration is something that may/would not have happened without carefully and thoughtfully listening to the debate first. Especially for those that may not be familiar with Joseph’s views (or his openness to being convinced one way or the other) in regards to Book of Mormon geography.

Again the Book of Mormon was published ten years or so before the works of Stephens and Catherwood.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

In honor of M.G.'s memory, I just watched the entire video.

There is nothing new at all. However, it's interesting to watch Jacob publicly lie and squirm when asked about written Hebrew being found in America. Watch this part for about 30 seconds: https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=4735

If you watch this clip for about 3 minutes, it sets forth all of Jacob's evidences for the divinity of the Book of Mormon (Nahom, Bountiful, Witnesses, how could a farm boy write a 500 page book, the positive effect the Book of Mormon has in people's lives): https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=286

Jacob also brings up Lidar a couple of times when asked why haven't any of the Book of Mormon cities been found. Apparently, Lidar is the answer because new cities are being found every day in Meso-America. It's just a matter of time folks. Keep paying your tithing and obey.

Thanks Everybody Wang Chung for making on point observations on the actual subject.I followed your first link and listened for a while(I had previously followed portions of the debate without hearing much different) I thought the Catholic fellow made some interesting observations about fitting all of the language of the Book of Mormon on the reported plates. It appears there is well short of enough room unless single glifs could represent 40 or more words. Hansen thought an expansion theory of translation might work. Bit of a stretch and not a comfortable one.

After that point there was discussion of other people like Native Americans living among the Nephite settlers. That discussion circled a we do not know what was intended by the book. Old fashioned people liked to speak of them selves and everybody else as generic others. I do not believe that fits Old Testament discussions of other people.

I think the simple observation,implied here, that the Book of Mormon does not have the presence of Natives that would figure in a real history is important. I realize that Mormons have moved away from the idea of land kept separate to be inhabited by the people from Judea. I have heard people point out that the population numbers spoken of exceed expected population growth. I think people arriving by boat would be presented with serious problems establishing relationships with the natives and those would figure large in the story.

yes, good points. the fact that the Book of Mormon has no "presence of natives" really sums it up.

[Chap]

the fact that the Book of Mormon has no "presence of natives" really sums it up.

Indeed ... why, it's almost as if those people didn't go to the real America at all, but simply made a voyage to somewhere in Joseph Smith's imagination.

How could that possibly be?

[MG 2.0]

What do YOU think about the point being made in regards to Joseph seemingly not having any firm idea about Book of Mormon geography all the way up through the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon. And then ten years later he has access to information that wasn’t available to him before that confirms to him that there might be a real world Book of Mormon geography.

He wasn’t even expecting that this might happen. Yet out of the blue, proof of the types of things the Book of Mormon was describing within its pages when published years before and critics were making fun of it because it didn’t describe the Indians THEY were familiar with.

Interesting, huh?

Brought up in Hansen’s video along with a lot of other stuff.

Watch it, you might learn something.

Regards,
MG

Some more to add:

The works of Stephens and Catherwood also provided Latter-day Saints with an effective rebuttal to a common reason for dismissing the Book of Mormon. That book tells of a people who had a sophisticated pre-Columbian culture, were literate, skilled in art (see Helaman 12:2), built temples (see 2 Nephi 5:16; Mosiah 1:18; Alma 16:13; 26:29; 3 Nephi 11:1), palaces (see Mosiah 11:9; Alma 22:2), and many large and populous cities (see Mosiah 27:6; Ether 13:5). This ran counter to one image of native American people that was common in the early nineteenth century. The biographer of John Lloyd Stephens notes, “The acceptance of an ‘Indian civilization’ demanded, to an American living in 1839, an entire reorientation, for him an Indian was one of those barbaric, half-naked tepee-dwellers against whom wars were constantly waged. A rude, subhuman people who hunted with the stealth of animals, they were artisans of buffalo robes, arrowheads, spears, and little else. Nor did one think of calling the other indigenous inhabitants of the continent ‘civilized.’”

https://rsc.BYU.edu/approaching-antiqui ... ook-Mormon

This exploration is something that may/would not have happened without carefully and thoughtfully listening to the debate first. Especially for those that may not be familiar with Joseph’s views (or his openness to being convinced one way or the other) in regards to Book of Mormon geography.

Again the Book of Mormon was published ten years or so before the works of Stephens and Catherwood.

Regards,
MG

In addition to this, at the time of Joseph Smith the critics portrayed the Book of Mormon as being another story of the lost ten tribes as that was of high interest to many. It was an expectation that Joseph was merely making up another story about the American Indians being descended from the lost ten tribes. Similar to that which we find in View of the Hebrews. But that’s not what he did and the Book of Mormon itself does not say this. (see Annotated Book of Mormon pg. 788)

So running in parallel to point I’m making in my previous post quoted above, the Book of Mormon doesn’t always ‘fit the mold’ of a narrative that came out of Joseph’s mind. Geography and storyline. They both seem to be independent of Joseph Smith and the milieu he found himself in.

Again, this train of thought and investigation is triggered by something brought up during the debate linked to on the first page of this thread. And yet throughout the thread we had essentially everyone simply piling on the messenger…either Jacob or myself…without engaging anything that had been discussed or brought up in the debate.

So then when I do, all I get is accusation that, well, that’s the only part you listened to. You didn’t listen to the whole thing. Just that one part.

C’mon people. Let’s stop with the shooting of messengers and engage with arguments.

This type of thing is what I’m talking about when I express my disinterest in where threads go. I just don’t find the ‘attack the messenger’ routine that is engaged in frequently to be either useful or interesting.

THAT is why I come and go. I would just as well not be involved in discussions around personalities rather than content.

I get it though. Any argument in favor of the Book of Mormon either needs to be ignored or twisted into some badly twisted strawman argument. After all, the Book of Mormon testifies of a true and living God to whom we are accountable.

Can’t have that!

I’ll check back in at a later time. I have some other things I want/need to do.

Best wishes.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

the fact that the Book of Mormon has no "presence of natives" really sums it up.

Indeed ... why, it's almost as if those people didn't go to the real America at all, but simply made a voyage to somewhere in Joseph Smith's imagination.

How could that possibly be?

Indeed.

Related to the idea of making up a voyage is the making up of the translation. A new post on reddit addresses the interesting new apologetic stance taken on this:

So a user on this sub has been asserting a newish apologetic that's uncommon, but which I predict will probably gain some traction by apologists as the evidence continues to demonstrate that Joseph Smith Jun's claim to be able to translate other languages into English was false.

Just to nip the apologetic in the bud, Joseph Smith did in fact claim to translate ancient hieroglyphics into English:

“I translated the Book of Mormon from hieroglyphics, the knowledge of which was lost to the world, in which wonderful event I stood alone, an unlearned youth, to combat the worldly wisdom and multiplied ignorance of eighteen centuries, with a new revelation, which (if they would receive the everlasting Gospel,) would open the eyes of more than eight hundred millions of people, and make ‘plain the old paths,’ wherein if a man walk in all the ordinances of God blameless, he shall inherit eternal life”\*
-History of the Church, 6:74

It's interesting that, even when these statements by Joseph Smith (and of course others who also reported that Joseph Smith said the same basic thing) where he claimed to translate the Book of Mormon from ancient writings (hieroglyphics) into English, apologists will not engage honestly because the claim now looks so bad given the evidence showing his claim to translate ancient Egyptian into English for the Book of Abraham.

While this isn't the lowest apologists stoop, it's kind of a fun new one they're beginning to try despite the deficiencies.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mormon/comment ... laimed_to/

[Chap]

Related to the idea of making up a voyage is the making up of the translation.

Ah, you see 'translate' as applied to a text can mean other things than simply producing a text in language X as close as possible in meaning and content to those of a text in language Y. Some apologists have kindly explained (as I recall) that it can mean doing none of those things, but somehow using a text in language Y as a kind of launch pad or provocation for the construction of an text in language X whose meaning and content have no connection with those of the language Y text, but are somehow hugely important. That's what Joseph Smith was doing when he produced the Book of Abraham from the Book of Breathings papyrus fragments. But unbelievers, poor naïve souls, continue to think that 'translate' can only be understood in the rather dull and plodding way set out above. Sad.

Or did I get that wrong?

[drumdude]

LDS apologists in Book of Mormon times…

[Morley]

Again, this train of thought and investigation is triggered by something brought up during the debate linked to on the first page of this thread. And yet throughout the thread we had essentially everyone simply piling on the messenger…either Jacob or myself…without engaging anything that had been discussed or brought up in the debate.

Once again: Just because you ignore the responses that you can't answer doesn't mean they didn't happen. One example:

In honor of M.G.'s memory, I just watched the entire video.

There is nothing new at all. However, it's interesting to watch Jacob publicly lie and squirm when asked about written Hebrew being found in America. Watch this part for about 30 seconds: https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=4735

If you watch this clip for about 3 minutes, it sets forth all of Jacob's evidences for the divinity of the Book of Mormon (Nahom, Bountiful, Witnesses, how could a farm boy write a 500 page book, the positive effect the Book of Mormon has in people's lives): https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=286

Jacob also brings up Lidar a couple of times when asked why haven't any of the Book of Mormon cities been found. Apparently, Lidar is the answer because new cities are being found every day in Meso-America. It's just a matter of time folks. Keep paying your tithing and obey.

Several other times, folks here have addressed the content of your linked video. For the most part, you pretend it didn't happen, all while rending your clothes and wailing to the heavens that you've either been ignored or victimized.

[MG 2.0]

Again, this train of thought and investigation is triggered by something brought up during the debate linked to on the first page of this thread. And yet throughout the thread we had essentially everyone simply piling on the messenger…either Jacob or myself…without engaging anything that had been discussed or brought up in the debate.

Once again: Just because you ignore the responses that you can't answer doesn't mean they didn't happen. One example:

In honor of M.G.'s memory, I just watched the entire video.

There is nothing new at all. However, it's interesting to watch Jacob publicly lie and squirm when asked about written Hebrew being found in America. Watch this part for about 30 seconds: https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=4735

If you watch this clip for about 3 minutes, it sets forth all of Jacob's evidences for the divinity of the Book of Mormon (Nahom, Bountiful, Witnesses, how could a farm boy write a 500 page book, the positive effect the Book of Mormon has in people's lives): https://youtu.be/9V_N0cRqzQU?t=286

Jacob also brings up Lidar a couple of times when asked why haven't any of the Book of Mormon cities been found. Apparently, Lidar is the answer because new cities are being found every day in Meso-America. It's just a matter of time folks. Keep paying your tithing and obey.

Several other times, folks here have addressed the content of your linked video. For the most part, you pretend it didn't happen, all while rending your clothes and wailing to the heavens that you've either been ignored or victimized.

I used the word “essentially”. Yes, a few people made short little soundbitey comments that honestly didn’t really go anywhere besides surface level. And as I’ve said, I don’t find that interesting.

In a few of my recent posts I’ve dug a little deeper than surface level and tried to show that there might be more places to go than simply responding with simple one or two sentence superficially focused responses.

In other words, something among a number of things that were said in this debate that were possible triggers for deeper thought and more research.

I didn’t see any of that. Thus my comment in being disinterested in conversations that mostly focus on personalities than content.

I suppose you idea of “addressed” doesn’t correlate with mine.

Even this post responding to yours really doesn’t take us anywhere. But here we are.

As I’ve also already said, this is why I get tired of much of the back and forth. I like to see if there is something new under the sun. My recent comments in regards to what Joseph could have known vs. not known I think fit that bill. At least for those that might not be aware of the two examples I outlined. There was no response to my posts. That’s OK. But it did demonstrate, at least to me (wang’s post being an example) that all too often folks aren’t really interested in going broader and deeper. Rather, it’s easier to go shallow, not do a bit of extra research and simply come back with a drive by criticism or short little not much of anything response.

I do come back now and then, however, when I think I have something worth sharing. My hope, as I’ve said, I’d that there are lurkers that are doing their own research and are are their own journey of faith seeking understanding from a believing or hopeful point of view in a creator God.

As it is, I realize that most of the respondents to my posts are either non believers in God or are on the fence. My guess is that it’s the straight up non believers who respond most of the time…although it’s hard to tell because, as I’ve said before, so few people around here are vulnerable enough to express their own beliefs and hopes.

If any.

We are veering off topic. My recent posts before this were on topic. Can we keep it there?

By the way, yes, huckleberry had some comments that came as close as anyone to having some good content. Thanks for that, huck.

Regards,
MG