Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[honorentheos]

What evidence is there that the location you claim as Bountiful could in fact support building transoceanic wooden ships?

Hi honor! As you know there has been a lot of ink spilled on this particular topic. Much speculation as to how the boat was built. Having read some of this stuff years ago the idea that I found making more sense than some others was that the materials needed for shipbuilding could have been transported to the area around Bountiful through trade or other forms of commerce.

The Arabian Peninsula was located along important trade routes in ancient times, and there is evidence that people in the region engaged in long-distance trade with places like Egypt, Mesopotamia, and India.

It's possible that Nephi and his family could have acquired materials like timber, pitch, or other resources through trade with merchants or traders passing through the region. If I remember correctly the Lehite colony would have had to make periodic excursions in order to hook up with those that dealt in trading.

This is one of a number of theories. But I kind of like it.

What is amazing is that they ended up in this fertile area directly East (through a lot of terrain that was full of danger and hazards) to finally get there.

What faith that would have taken!

Regards,
MG

It's interesting that this requires recontextualizing the narrative from one where the Lehi party journeyed into the wilderness, to one where they were in the hub of trade. The book itself does not convey this to be the case.

Now, your supposed bullseye effectively comes down to there being anywhere along the Arabian peninsula that was more of an oasis. There are no actual durations of travel, minimal and vague directions, and zero landmarks. It's a case of Texas sharpshooter if anything and it doesn't actually fill every need to actually accomplish everything the narrative claims the Lehi party did there.

It's pretty sad as far as evidence goes, really. And that's without the new world problems where the Book of Mormon maps very well onto 19th century prejudices while having zero meaningful matches with actual pre-Columbian cultures and the archaeological record.

I'd say the Book of a Mormon is not only not inspired, it is in fact an unfortunate mechanism for perpetuating damaging beliefs about indigenous peoples of the Americas.

[honorentheos]

I'm strongly of the opinion the argument goes the other way. Smith tried but failed to return to the lost record project after his first failed attempt resulted in the loss of the Book of Lehi. We have no idea what the quality was of that text. The project was only completed once Oliver Cowdery came and the two of them could work largely unmolested at the Whitmer's. Most claims about the Book of Mormon production confuse accounts from the creation of the Book of Lehi where the work was performed on much less friendly grounds.

If anything the fact Smith couldn't produce the work until Cowdery showed up undermines claims its production was miraculous.

I’m assuming you have read Watson’s timeline I linked to earlier?

Regards,
MG

Not only have I, but I feel if the old board were more easily searched I could find where I had shared it with you.

Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon despite what even critics like to say. He couldn't. Otherwise he would have done so when he kept trying to but failed until Cowdery arrived. I also believe the ability to largely sequester on the Whitmer farm was essential to their being able to compose it. They weren't sitting around with their faces in hats. They were sitting at a table co-authoring the text we have beginning in Mosiah before coming back and figuring out how to reintegrate the lost Lehi material as the Books of 1st and 2nd Nephi.

[MG 2.0]

I’m assuming you have read Watson’s timeline I linked to earlier?

Regards,
MG

Not only have I, but I feel if the old board were more easily searched I could find where I had shared it with you.

Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon despite what even critics like to say. He couldn't. Otherwise he would have done so when he kept trying to but failed until Cowdery arrived. I also believe the ability to largely sequester on the Whitmer farm was essential to their being able to compose it. They weren't sitting around with their faces in hats. They were sitting at a table co-authoring the text we have beginning in Mosiah before coming back and figuring out how to reintegrate the lost Lehi material as the Books of 1st and 2nd Nephi.

The major problem that occurs here is that there isn’t any evidence to support your position. To the best of my knowledge Oliver only gave positive testimony throughout his life (miraculous nature of the Book of Mormon) even when disaffected. I think I would be more likely to encourage others to take him at his word rather than dissuade them from doing so.

Regards,
MG

[honorentheos]

Not only have I, but I feel if the old board were more easily searched I could find where I had shared it with you.

Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon despite what even critics like to say. He couldn't. Otherwise he would have done so when he kept trying to but failed until Cowdery arrived. I also believe the ability to largely sequester on the Whitmer farm was essential to their being able to compose it. They weren't sitting around with their faces in hats. They were sitting at a table co-authoring the text we have beginning in Mosiah before coming back and figuring out how to reintegrate the lost Lehi material as the Books of 1st and 2nd Nephi.

The major problem that occurs here is that there isn’t any evidence to support your position. To the best of my knowledge Oliver only gave positive testimony throughout his life (miraculous nature of the Book of Mormon) even when disaffected. I think I would be more likely to encourage others to take him at his word rather than dissuade them from doing so.

Regards,
MG

No evidence? The only actual non-testimony evidence we have is Smith did not complete more of the book until Cowdery arrived. It's the strongest evidence if anything.

[honorentheos]

Regarding Cowdery and the Whitmers, they all rejected Smith once he began to insert polygamy into the religion. They knew him.

Remember MG that the church basically suffered a minor schism a year after it's founding. The Whitmers and Cowdery went to Missouri after Smith ditched them for Rigdon who collectively organized their own group in Ohio. The leadership struggles between the two groups were real, and the failure of Kirkland resulted in Smith/Rigdon usurping power back in Missouri.

The parties involved in the creation of the Book of Mormon had a power dynamic that reveals how much they actually believed in Smith's calling as prophet.

The Whitmers used their involvement in the creation of the Book of Mormon to attempt to start their own religion. Cowdery distanced himself and tried to be a respectable member of society which always suffered when his connections to Mormonism resurfaced.

The Book of Mormon is not an inspirational work nor the work of a positive being seeking to improve the human condition. Far from it.

[MG 2.0]

The major problem that occurs here is that there isn’t any evidence to support your position. To the best of my knowledge Oliver only gave positive testimony throughout his life (miraculous nature of the Book of Mormon) even when disaffected. I think I would be more likely to encourage others to take him at his word rather than dissuade them from doing so.

Regards,
MG

No evidence? The only actual non-testimony evidence we have is Smith did not complete more of the book until Cowdery arrived. It's the strongest evidence if anything.

Near the end of his life, Cowdery reportedly reaffirmed his testimony to Jacob Gates, a visitor to his home, stating:

"Jacob, I want you to remember what I say to you. I am a dying man, and what would it profit me to tell you a lie? I know that this Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God. My eyes saw, my ears heard, and my understanding was touched, and I know that whereof I testified is true."

I would agree with you that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon. I believe it was done through the gift and power of God, as Oliver testified.

And we shouldn’t leave this earlier testimony out from a letter that Oliver Cowdery wrote to W.W. Phelps in 1834:

"These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, 'Interpreters,' the history or record called 'The Book of Mormon.'"

Yes, Cowdery was involved in the translation process. Just not in the way you think.

I suppose we’ll just have to disagree on that.

But one way or the other, it makes a lot of difference doesn’t it? I can see why you would stick to your story.

Regards,
MG

[honorentheos]

MG, the totality of the evidence is strongly against the Book of Mormon being a record of an ancient people while clearly being a product of 19th century American Christian frontier ideas. To imagine there is some divine being that inspired it requires defining "divine" in radical and frankly degrading ways.

Cowdery clearly had to be present for the Book of Mormon to be produced as we have it. "God" and Smith could not do it before then as Smith tried but failed, practically abandoning the project at points. That is a fact of history. Read into it what you will and assume that Cowdery, hoping to rejoin Young after his being left destitute and without recourse, was recounting to a member - a leader in fact - his testimony as it were, as that reaffirming was told to others by said leader. That's not a particularly convincing piece of evidence and is second hand testimony.

ETA: correction, it is third hand testimony as it was recounted by Gates' son.

For most of his life after being excommunicated Cowdery hid from his involvement. You have no idea if he stood by the testimony and there are sources that suggest he didn't such as the hymn documented in the Times and Seasons as well as told by his law partner.

Again, the non-testimony evidence we have is Smith could not produce the Book of Mormon until Cowdery showed up. That's telling.

[huckelberry]

Lorem ipsum is a traditional placeholder text, what he posted was essentially dressed-up nonsense spam.

yes, a pattern that might change,or might not.

[Gadianton]

One thing I do find interesting other than Gadianton’s failure to refer to the link in the Interpreter

Why would I link to the Interpreter? This thread is about Jacob Hanson's video. Maybe the problem is that YOU didn't link to Interpreter, and instead posted a video that fell hard into the very trap Jenkin's talks about?

I looked at JL's response and it isn't very good. As Honor explains in more detail, the Book of Mormon does not identify the route Lehi took. It could be anything within thousands of square miles, it's only obvious to apologist after generating a wish list of parallels that would be really cool if that's what the Book of Mormon was talking about. How can they cram in the most hits to Lehi's loose narrative? And JL avoids the most obvious problem of Joseph Smith simply pulling the name from the Bible like he did hundreds of other times. What are the chances that Joseph Smith didn't get the dozens or hundreds of names that are direct Bible names or simple rifs on Bible names from the Bible? And Nahom consonant clusters are within the most frequent clusters used throughout the Book of Mormon.

is that his source doesn’t mention anything about the Book of Mormon narrative then moving on from Nahom directly East and ending up at Bountiful.

If there's no merit to Nahom in the first place, which there isn't, then there is no point looking for additional parallels to support the original failed claim.

[MG 2.0]

One thing I do find interesting other than Gadianton’s failure to refer to the link in the Interpreter

Why would I link to the Interpreter? This thread is about Jacob Hanson's video. Maybe the problem is that YOU didn't link to Interpreter, and instead posted a video that fell hard into the very trap Jenkin's talks about?

I looked at JL's response and it isn't very good. As Honor explains in more detail, the Book of Mormon does not identify the route Lehi took. It could be anything within thousands of square miles, it's only obvious to apologist after generating a wish list of parallels that would be really cool if that's what the Book of Mormon was talking about. How can they cram in the most hits to Lehi's loose narrative? And JL avoids the most obvious problem of Joseph Smith simply pulling the name from the Bible like he did hundreds of other times. What are the chances that Joseph Smith didn't get the dozens or hundreds of names that are direct Bible names or simple rifs on Bible names from the Bible? And Nahom consonant clusters are within the most frequent clusters used throughout the Book of Mormon.

is that his source doesn’t mention anything about the Book of Mormon narrative then moving on from Nahom directly East and ending up at Bountiful.

If there's no merit to Nahom in the first place, which there isn't, then there is no point looking for additional parallels to support the original failed claim.

But there is merit. Is it arguable? Yes. The thing is, when you add on the rest of the story…beeline to Bountiful from THAT point…then things may open up. Your source, if I remember correctly, doesn’t even mention Bountiful. I think he should have, as it is a straight shot from Nahom.

It adds to the likelihood rather than subtracts. After all, the Lehites had had a rough go of it. That Joseph inserted a ‘shangrila’ into the narrative to act as ‘saving grace’ without it being based in fact would have been a HUGE problem for the overall exodus story from Jerusalem to the New World. As it was, wala!, Joseph nailed it. I have not seen any evidence that he knew of the two areas that had shagrila like qualities.

The fact that they ended up in Bountiful lends a hand to Nahum being the last ‘turning point’ before arriving at their destination.

Two unlikely coincidences?

Regards,
MG