Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[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.

Additional information:

The location of Bountiful on the coast of the Arabian Sea would have made it a prime location for trade and commerce, as it was situated along important trade routes connecting Arabia to India and East Africa.
The practice of trade and commerce was deeply ingrained in Arabian culture, with many tribes relying on trade for their livelihoods.

Pi A.I.

Proof? No. Placing the Lehites in the right geographical area at the right time?

Seems so. Confirmed evidence? Again, no. I never said it was.

History was a long time ago. The Book of Mormon has some interesting parallels with the ancient world that were either inserted purposefully by Joseph Smith or they were part of the revealed text. And that’s along with Hebraisms in the text such as examples of Seidel’s Law, along with other interesting internal anomalies that either have to be attributed to either ‘lucky hits’ or purposeful construction. Chiastic structure, etc.

I just came across Seidel’s Law the other day. That was new to me.

Was it Joseph Smith or an intrinsic part of a revealed text, Easter eggs of a sort, to give some indication of a real connection with the ancient world rather than simply being contrived/produced by Joseph Smith (who many would acknowledge did not have the ability or resources) pulling it off. And then some knowing this try to pin it on Oliver Cowdery.

Examples of Seidel’s Law in the Book of Mormon:

This literary practice was utterly unnoticed in the Hebrew Bible until the mid-twentieth century, so its presence in the Book of Mormon argues against modern authorship or, given its repeated use, coincidence. Rather, the use of inverted quotations is another striking example of unmistakably ancient literary forms discoverable in the Book of Mormon text that, as they have accrued in number, “have increasingly exemplified the strong correlation between Israelite and Nephite authors.”

https://rsc.BYU.edu/preserved-translati ... quotations

I mean, you can’t make this stuff up…although critics would prefer to actually make that their first choice over anything having to do with ‘God did it’.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

A.I. at this level is simply trying to produce a text that relates to the prompt text in a way suggested by the very large quantity of other texts it has been trained on. It is important to realise that the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here.

Do you mean in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria? If so, I agree. But, in the sense that mentalgymnast has, every time he uses it, implied that the A.I. answer he includes in one of his posts is true, then I disagree that "the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here." If mg were using A.I. in a responsible way, we could rely on your comment, but he doesn't.

On the other hand, what reader here doesn't yet know how intellectually dishonest mg's posts are?

[honorentheos]

Additional information:

The location of Bountiful on the coast of the Arabian Sea would have made it a prime location for trade and commerce, as it was situated along important trade routes connecting Arabia to India and East Africa.
The practice of trade and commerce was deeply ingrained in Arabian culture, with many tribes relying on trade for their livelihoods.

Pi A.I.

Proof? No. Placing the Lehites in the right geographical area at the right time?

Seems so. Confirmed evidence? Again, no. I never said it was.

What do you mean right location, right time? The inscription date is made up by Mormon apologists, not unbiased archaeologists. The location of the inscription is in a geographically challenging area to align with the narrative as a whole. Travel from the inscription location to the East is geographically challenging. And you have to fabricate the potential for trade where the Book of Mormon indicates isolation.

History was a long time ago. The Book of Mormon has some interesting parallels with the ancient world that were either inserted purposefully by Joseph Smith or they were part of the revealed text. And that’s along with Hebraisms in the text such as examples of Seidel’s Law, along with other interesting internal anomalies that either have to be attributed to either ‘lucky hits’ or purposeful construction. Chiastic structure, etc.

I just came across Seidel’s Law the other day. That was new to me.

Was it Joseph Smith or an intrinsic part of a revealed text, Easter eggs of a sort, to give some indication of a real connection with the ancient world rather than simply being contrived/produced by Joseph Smith (who many would acknowledge did not have the ability or resources) pulling it off. And then some knowing this try to pin it on Oliver Cowdery.

Examples of Seidel’s Law in the Book of Mormon:

This literary practice was utterly unnoticed in the Hebrew Bible until the mid-twentieth century, so its presence in the Book of Mormon argues against modern authorship or, given its repeated use, coincidence. Rather, the use of inverted quotations is another striking example of unmistakably ancient literary forms discoverable in the Book of Mormon text that, as they have accrued in number, “have increasingly exemplified the strong correlation between Israelite and Nephite authors.”

https://rsc.BYU.edu/preserved-translati ... quotations

I mean, you can’t make this stuff up…although critics would prefer to actually make that their first choice over anything having to do with ‘God did it’.

Regards,
MG

What are you talking about? The supposed evidence for Hebrewism in the Book of Mormon was shown to be similar to those found in The Late War. Attempting to sound biblical apparently leads to shadows of Hebrew structures arising in the attempts.

So, no Nephites, blatant examples of 19th century beliefs, direct attempts to include misconceptions from the 19th century that have been proven false including the idea a white race populated the Americas that was destroyed by the indigenous peoples Europeans couldn't believe we're capable of the feats of science and engineering they found...but if you misrepresent evidence you may have a linguistic connection between 1 Nephi and the Kingdom of Saba?

Bro.

[honorentheos]

by the way, MG, knowing that belief in a Creator God is fundamental to how you engage with evidence I'm interested in how you can be certain the LDS church isn't functioning like the Sanhedrin in the time of Christ? Allowing for Mormon doctrine to be generally true, how is it possible an organization that renders moral judgment to a demand for obedience not more like the plan Satan put forward? Doesn't it stand to reason that learning to judge morally and overcome the test of mortality to learn true godliness may in fact render the Church an obstacle or test to be overcome to learn to think as God thinks and feel as God feels?

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?

[Gadianton]

Travel from the inscription location to the East is geographically challenging. And you have to fabricate the potential for trade where the Book of Mormon indicates isolation.

MG seems to be confusing speculation with evidence. But what can you do but speculate when the information about travel is so thin?

His copilot response is ridiculous. Yeah, they could have been deeply involved in trade along established trade routes. It's just that the Book of Mormon says they stuck with the wilderness and survived by hunting, until they happened upon Bountiful, at which time they switched to gathering. The fact that there could have been trade routes all over this area in no way backs up what the Book of Mormon actually says.

If it was so unsafe that they had to hide in the wilderness and never build fires, then the existence of well established trade routes connecting the supposed points of travel is contradictory. If the dangers of raiders was so high, there wouldn't be these established, lucrative routes. If we're going to fill in blanks and say they were actually following trade routes and surviving by trading, then the journey shouldn't have taken 8 years. The first pioneers crossed the plains in 4 months.

[Marcus]

Travel from the inscription location to the East is geographically challenging. And you have to fabricate the potential for trade where the Book of Mormon indicates isolation.

MG seems to be confusing speculation with evidence. But what can you do but speculate when the information about travel is so thin?

His copilot response is ridiculous. Yeah, they could have been deeply involved in trade along established trade routes.

Trading with seafarer 'experts' who moved along the Coast in leather boats and rafts. He has a lot of misses in this A.I. rendition.

It's just that the Book of Mormon says they stuck with the wilderness and survived by hunting, until they happened upon Bountiful, at which time they switched to gathering. The fact that there could have been trade routes all over this area in no way backs up what the Book of Mormon actually says.

If it was so unsafe that they had to hide in the wilderness and never build fires, then the existence of well established trade routes connecting the supposed points of travel is contradictory. If the dangers of raiders was so high, there wouldn't be these established, lucrative routes. If we're going to fill in blanks and say they were actually following trade routes and surviving by trading, then the journey shouldn't have taken 8 years. The first pioneers crossed the plains in 4 months.

As you have noted, so much of his A.I. posts don't really fit the bill. But, as a
Mormon apologetic, that seems to be par for the course.

[honorentheos]

Travel from the inscription location to the East is geographically challenging. And you have to fabricate the potential for trade where the Book of Mormon indicates isolation.

MG seems to be confusing speculation with evidence. But what can you do but speculate when the information about travel is so thin?

His copilot response is ridiculous. Yeah, they could have been deeply involved in trade along established trade routes. It's just that the Book of Mormon says they stuck with the wilderness and survived by hunting, until they happened upon Bountiful, at which time they switched to gathering. The fact that there could have been trade routes all over this area in no way backs up what the Book of Mormon actually says.

If it was so unsafe that they had to hide in the wilderness and never build fires, then the existence of well established trade routes connecting the supposed points of travel is contradictory. If the dangers of raiders was so high, there wouldn't be these established, lucrative routes. If we're going to fill in blanks and say they were actually following trade routes and surviving by trading, then the journey shouldn't have taken 8 years. The first pioneers crossed the plains in 4 months.

It's interesting that he feels the issue dissolves, or better said rebounds, if one assumes God exists and is involved in people's lives. How so? How does that possibility override the inconsistencies his evidence creates for the text? No one who disbelieves in the Book of Mormon as ancient feels compelled to reconcile how 1 Nephi can simultaneously be describing both a journey in the wilderness and interactions along a major trade route. That's what happens in bad fiction writing. Yet in his own words we are left jumping through hoops to make the arguments work. Genuinely, his username is misrepresenting his behavior. It's not gymnastics, something requiring skill and practice. It's the mental equivalent of Johnny Knoxville and crew putting on a football helmet and riding a shopping cart down a hill.

[Morley]

I just came across Seidel’s Law the other day. That was new to me.

Yeah, from what I can find, it's new to almost everybody, except Hebrew scholars. It's pretty obscure.

Examples of Seidel’s Law in the Book of Mormon:

To be clear, these aren't examples given by Rabbi Seidel, whose work was centered on comparing portions of the Hebrew Bible. It's an appropriation of Moshe Seidel's theory to justify Mormonism's claim that the Book of Mormon has Hebrew language roots. I doubt if Dr Seidel or any other Judaic scholar who promotes this theory would agree with either the usage or the conclusion.

I mean, you can’t make this stuff up…

Apparently, you kind of can. This is pretty weak.

[Gadianton]

It's interesting that he feels the issue dissolves, or better said rebounds, if one assumes God exists and is involved in people's lives. How so? How does that possibility override the inconsistencies his evidence creates for the text

We've been through this with MG dozens of times. He's fast to point out the gulf between believers and unbelievers in God, and we remind him that there are probably more believers (in God) who reject everything he's telling us here (Mormon specific) than unbelievers. Phillip Jenkins is a believer. The Catholic guys on that podcast are believers, and they ain't going to be convinced. More believers in God have likely investigated Book of Mormon claims and rejected than unbelievers who generally wouldn't care enough to look. He also doesn't seem to realize that most of us on this board came from deeply faithful Mormon backgrounds, were active, went to seminary, went on missions, and so on, and it's not like we don't understand what being a believer is like.

It's not gymnastics, something requiring skill and practice

Indeed. It's not gymnastics, or something that requires skill.

And inserted it into Google search. The first response was this:

yeah, A.I. doesn't understand context. How could it? That's a classic example.

Apparently, you kind of can. This is pretty weak.

He can and he did.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

MG when posting here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/s/YeIJRhBv7N

- Doc