Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[honorentheos]

Its interesting how gladly folks like MG will cling to any theory that supports a partial claim, even when it creates entirely new contradictions. For the NHM inscription to work it requires the Lehi party to travel through the Kingdom of Saba along trade roads and populated cities that the Book of Mormon fails to mention. The Book of Mormon explicitly states the Lehi party traveled in the wilderness, in fact, so the marginal evidence it provides makes the book unreliable.

Bizarre.

Yet one must not suppose folks like MG really treat evidence with any degree of real care. How could he if he is willing to put forward a third hand account as countering the argument Cowdery was required for the Book of Mormon to be produced that arises from the timeline of events themselves? It's not like he also accepts Cowdery as an authority on Smith having engaged in an affair with Fanny Alger despite that being recorded in multiple sources. Clearly he is happy to be selective with testimony evidence in addition to careless with the text itself.

[honorentheos]

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.



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

MG, how do you suppose this argument isn't a result of a Texas sharpshooter fallacy? The Book of Mormon barely provides directions and the durations of travel are vague. The book itself barely says more than what could easily have been someone looking at a map and referencing large geographic features: the group went east from Jerusalem then south around the Red Sea and then to the east again. That could mean anything.

For NHM to work the party would have to have gone through a major city after traveling along a well defined trade route despite saying they were traveling through the wildness while God was guiding them to the sources of food and water. Those water sources are why the trade route would have developed where it did, this makes a problematic contradiction in the text for what is largely as linguistic nonsense as evidence for the Book of Mormon. NHM and Nahom are only connected in the minds of apologists.

So finding a wadi that happens to be east of the Arabian peninsula is laughable as evidence, especially when it doesn't support the claim the Lehi party built tools and boats there in a manner they were taught by God. Claiming they were engaging trade to resolve this? Really?

[MG 2.0]

Cowdery clearly had to be present for the Book of Mormon to be produced as we have it. "

And that, of course, is debatable. What isn’t debatable is that he was present for most of the Book of Mormon translation.

Over the years as I’ve looked at much of the same material and testimony that you have I’ve considered which might be more likely…all the convoluted hoops you guys have to jump through (when you take God out of the picture)…or looking at the less convoluted story of ‘God did it”.

For me, the less convoluted and straight forward narrative is the one that seems to have the greater likelihood of being true. Especially when I throw in all the arguments for ‘greater purpose’ and possible evidences that cause one to strongly consider the existence of God, etc.

So as I’ve mentioned in this thread and at other times, we will just go around in circles on this.

For me, the Book of Mormon fits in nicely with larger picture of ‘does God make Himself known in the world today?’ question. I would like to think and have hope and faith that he does.

Good to hear from you again, honor. I hope you and your family are happy and well.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

honor:
It's not like he also accepts Cowdery as an authority on Smith having engaged in an affair with Fanny Alger despite that being recorded in multiple sources.

To the best of my knowledge there was a relationship between Joseph and Fanny. Many considered it to be his first ‘plural marriage’. Oliver and Emma didn’t look at it that way.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I’ve got stuff to move onto for now. I’ll check back later.

Regards,
MG

[honorentheos]

Cowdery clearly had to be present for the Book of Mormon to be produced as we have it. "

And that, of course, is debatable. What isn’t debatable is that he was present for most of the Book of Mormon translation.

Is it? Then what to make of the fact - fact - Smith attempted to resume the project but could make little to no progress without him after the loss of the Book of Lehi? And then after Cowdery arrives the supposed miracle of the three month production of the book occurs? Debatable? I know which side of that argument is going to win.

Over the years as I’ve looked at much of the same material and testimony that you have I’ve considered which might be more likely…all the convoluted hoops you guys have to jump through (when you take God out of the picture)…or looking at the less convoluted story of ‘God did it”.

For me, the less convoluted and straight forward narrative is the one that seems to have the greater likelihood of being true. Especially when I throw in all the arguments for ‘grater purpose’ and possible evidences that cause one to strongly consider the existence of God, etc.

So as I’ve mentioned in this thread and at other times, we will just go around in circles on this.

For me, the Book of Mormon fits in nicely with larger picture of ‘does God make Himself known in the world today?’ question. I would like to think and have hope and faith that he does.

Good to hear from you again, honor. I hope you and your family are happy and well.

Regards,
MG

MG, you have told us multiple times that any evidence you will accept has to allow for a Creator God as axiomatic. That's an insertion.

But you know what? I think you are missing a bigger piece of evidence which is: If Mormon doctrine is true, the Mormon church is acting in Satan's interest and must therefore be a test. There is no other way to square the circle of the purpose of mortality teaching folks to become godly. It's brilliant in some ways, really. The religion of YHWY at the time of Christ was described as an impediment to true worship while maintaining some form of authority according to scripture. How better to establish conditions where the elect can emulate Christ than though an authoritarian structure that suppresses agency and moral judgement?

If you want to assume a Creator God and Mormon doctrine is true, show how it makes more sense that the Church is fostering godliness rather than functioning as a challenge that, if seen for what it is and the compulsions are overcome so ine learns to engage in actual moral reasoning, doesn't better align with the claimed work and glory of God?

[honorentheos]

honor:
It's not like he also accepts Cowdery as an authority on Smith having engaged in an affair with Fanny Alger despite that being recorded in multiple sources.

To the best of my knowledge there was a relationship between Joseph and Fanny. Many considered it to be his first ‘plural marriage’. Oliver and Emma didn’t look at it that way.

Regards,
MG

Neither did the rest of the saints who were unaware of it and largely denied it. Seeing it as a plural marriage is anachronistic. It was an affair and adultery by any definition.

[Gadianton]

MG, how do you suppose this argument isn't a result of a Texas sharpshooter fallacy? The Book of Mormon barely provides directions and the durations of travel are vague. The book itself barely says more than what could easily have been someone looking at a map and referencing large geographic features: the group went east from Jerusalem then south around the Red Sea and then to the east again. That could mean anything.

Nephi says they travelled for 8 years in the wilderness. That's enough time that any route from Jerusalem to the sea following a couple broad direction changes is possible.

[Moksha]

Nephi says they travelled for 8 years in the wilderness.

They had to scout around for shipbuilders and supplies. Do you think they outsourced to the Phonecians, Greeks, or Vikings? The Vikings had cool prows on their longships.

[MG 2.0]

So finding a wadi that happens to be east of the Arabian peninsula is laughable as evidence, especially when it doesn't support the claim the Lehi party built tools and boats there in a manner they were taught by God. Claiming they were engaging trade to resolve this? Really?

The local tribes that the Lehites may have traded with at Bountiful are not specifically named in the Book of Mormon, but based on historical and archaeological evidence, we can make some educated guesses about who they might have been.

One possibility is that the Lehites may have traded with the Sabaeans, a powerful trading nation that controlled much of southern Arabia during the time period in question. The Sabaeans were known for their expertise in seafaring and shipbuilding, and they had extensive trade networks throughout the region.

Another possibility is that the Lehites may have traded with the Minaeans, another Arabian tribe that was active in trade and commerce during this period. The Minaeans were known for their metalworking skills and their trade in precious metals, which could have been of interest to the Lehites.

Of course, it's also possible that the Lehites traded with smaller, less well-known tribes in the region.

*Pi A.I. inquiry.

Regards,
MG