ChatGPT Pro: 0% Chance The Book of Mormon Is An Accurate Translation Of An Authentic Ancient Codex

[Kishkumen]

I did not need A.I. to come to this conclusion. I am not sure A.I. increases my confidence in this conclusion.

[Analytics]

I did not need A.I. to come to this conclusion. I am not sure A.I. increases my confidence in this conclusion.

Of course. Delegating your thinking and decision making process to A.I. is lazy and self-defeating. However, it can be an amazing tool to actually help you clarify your thoughts, perform a check against your own biases, look for new ideas, and see if there are better ways to express yourself.

[MG 2.0]

I pointed this at Kyle Rasmussen’s “Estimating the Evidence” and told it to use “deep research” and 01 pro mode to evaluate it. It said a lot, but concluded:

Let me put it bluntly: Determining whether the Book of Mormon (Book of Mormon) is literally an ancient text translated via divine inspiration—and not a product of Joseph Smith’s own mind plus cultural/environmental inputs—is about as straightforward as nailing green Jell-O to a tree. Probability estimates here depend hugely on one’s initial assumptions about the supernatural...

I then said forget about the supernatural. If you were wide open to the supernatural, what would you think?

If I’m genuinely wide open to supernatural explanations—no eyebrow raised at the idea of angels, gold plates, or revelations through seer stones—then I’d put the Book of Mormon’s “ancient-authentic translation” hypothesis in the realm of plausible. In other words, I’d weigh the reported witnesses, the odd hits with Middle Eastern geography (Nahom, etc.), the complex literary structure, and the presence of what seem like archaic language features, and I’d say:

It’s maybe better than a coin flip that the Book of Mormon reflects an authentic ancient record (rather than purely 19th-century invention), if I’ve already tossed out the usual naturalistic roadblocks.

Why not higher than, say, 90+%? Because even if I leave the door wide open to miracles, the text still shows a fair amount of 19th-century American imprint (theological concerns of Joseph’s frontier environment, quotations from the King James Bible complete with translation quirks, and anachronisms like horses, steel, etc. that are still up in the air). On top of that, after 200 years, we haven’t dug up definitive smoking-gun archaeological sites that match Book of Mormon civilizations in a way that shouts, “Yep, it’s definitely these guys.”

Still, from a purely “God can do whatever He wants” point of view, there’s enough bizarre “coincidences” or intricate textual features to keep the ancient-authentic possibility very much alive—well above zero, and plausibly above 50%. My own stance (again, if I’m giving the supernatural every benefit of the doubt) would be something in the ballpark of 60–70%.

Wow.

Yes. Wow.

Regards,
MG

[Moksha]

Still, from a purely “God can do whatever He wants” point of view, there are enough bizarre “coincidences” or intricate textual features to keep the ancient-authentic possibility very much alive—well above zero, and plausibly above 50%. My own stance (again, if I’m giving the supernatural every benefit of the doubt) would be something in the ballpark of 60–70%.

Wow.

Yes. Wow.

Regards,
MG

His journey along the Yellow Brick Road to meet the Wizard will be successful at that rate.

[bill4long]

Let’s look at it from another angle. Is the Book of Mormon a reliable guide to understanding the people of the Americas from 600BC to 1000AD? Not can you find coincidences, but as a whole is it an actual guide?

If Mormons are correct, we have an absolutely amazing insight into the lives, culture, and language of pre-Columbian Americans. Decades ago, before the Internet, Mormons used to spread the belief that non-Mormon archeologists had a Book of Mormon hidden in their backpacks, secretly drawing from it to guide them forward.

It’s completely absurd. They can’t even pretend that the Book of Mormon has any value to archeologists anymore. The characters in the Book of Mormon discuss 18th century Protestant theology. It would be as silly as an ancient Roman book where Caesar monologues about the merits of Marxism.

The Book of Mormon is an obvious fraud, but what has tickled me for years is why no mention of ducks, geese, deer, turkeys, swans, and a bunch of other stuff that natives ate in 600BC through 400AD. Joe and his co-conspiritors were pretty narrow. The animals mentioned were all basically animals mentioned in the Bible.

[Analytics]

Wow.

Yes. Wow.

Regards,
MG

I responded to ChatGPT, "Interesting. Could you list, in order, what you think the 20 strongest pieces of evidence are?”

It said:

Below is one person’s subjective ranking of 20 notable “lines of evidence” pointing toward the Book of Mormon’s possible ancient origins, assuming we’re fully open to divine or supernatural involvement. Other believers might order these differently or emphasize different points, but this is a reasonable stab at the “top 20.”

1. Nahom & Arabian Trail Correlations
One of the best-known specific hits: Nephi’s record mentions traveling south-southeast along the Red Sea, turning east, and passing a place called “Nahom,” which plausibly corresponds to an actual site/tribal area (NHM) in modern Yemen. Proponents say it’s unlikely Joseph Smith in 1829 could have “guessed” this accurately.

2. Detailed Old World Geography (Bountiful)
The Book of Mormon describes a fertile coastal area east of Nahom called “Bountiful,” featuring fruit and honey. Southern Oman (Wadi Sayq/Khor Kharfot region) is a surprisingly close match—a lush oasis along an otherwise barren coast.

3. Complexity & Internal Consistency in a Rapid Dictation
Joseph dictated roughly 500+ pages of dense, internally consistent text in under three months—without notes or rewrites, as far as witnesses reported. The sheer complexity (genealogies, interwoven plotlines, etc.) impresses even some skeptics who admit it’s no trivial feat.

4. Archaic Language / Early Modern English Elements
Linguistic studies (Skousen, Carmack) indicate that the earliest Book of Mormon text contains archaic forms more typical of Early Modern English (1500s–1600s) than the 19th century. Some see this as evidence of an older “source” language or a nontrivial translation process.

5. Chiasmus and Other Semitic Literary Forms
The discovery of chiastic structures (inverted parallelisms) in the Book of Mormon—particularly Alma 36—caught many by surprise. These are common in ancient Semitic writing but weren’t identified as a distinctive literary form by modern biblical scholars until well after the Book of Mormon was published.

6. Multiple First-Person Voices & Distinct Styles (Stylometry)
Wordprint (stylometric) studies suggest different textual “voices” for figures like Nephi, Alma, Moroni, etc., potentially indicating multiple authors rather than a single 19th-century hand. While not definitive, it’s at least consistent with the claim of a compiled record.

7. Witnesses of the Gold Plates
Beyond Joseph Smith, multiple men (the Three and the Eight Witnesses) swore they physically saw and/or handled the metal plates and engravings. Critics question their reliability, but even under tough scrutiny, most stuck to their stories to the end of their lives.

8. Time Constraints / Personal Background of Joseph Smith
Young, undereducated farmhand in his early 20s dictates a massive, theologically complex text in ~65–75 working days. Without supernatural help, it’s a mind-boggling achievement—still possible, but improbable enough to raise eyebrows.

9. Hebraisms and Semitic Idioms
Phrases like “if … and” constructions, “and it came to pass” usage, cognate accusatives, and other supposed Hebrew-like syntax appear throughout the Book of Mormon. These might be remnants of a literal translation from a Semitic language.

10. Structure of Plates & “Record of Records” Idea
The Book of Mormon references multiple sets of plates (large plates, small plates, the brass plates) and an abridgment process by Mormon. This layered editorial framework is somewhat reminiscent of ancient record-keeping methods—arguably beyond what a frontier farmhand might invent offhand.

11. Rapid-Fire Dictation with No Revisions on the Fly
Scribes like Oliver Cowdery and Emma Smith said that Joseph rarely paused or backtracked to revise earlier text. This implies strong internal consistency despite minimal revision—a curious feature if it were purely ad-libbed.

12. Alleged “Reformed Egyptian” & Ancient Metal Plates Traditions
Though “Reformed Egyptian” is not known in modern scholarship, records engraved on metal plates have been discovered in various ancient cultures, including the Near East and Mediterranean. It’s at least plausible that an ancient group could preserve sacred records on metal.

13. Doctrinal Complexity and Depth
The Book of Mormon weaves together prophecies, teachings on Christ’s atonement, complex covenant theology, and nuanced spiritual discussions. Believers see this depth as unlikely for a 19th-century farm youth; critics say Joseph had help from revival culture, but it’s still no small feat.

14. King James Bible Intertextuality (In a “Translation”)
While some see the Book of Mormon’s reliance on KJV language as evidence of a 19th-century origin, others argue that if the biblical passages were part of the ancient brass plates (or used as a base for “translating” Isaiah’s text already on the plates), that might explain the heavy KJV flavor.

15. Prophetic/Redemptive Themes Over Centuries in the Text
The Book of Mormon narrative spans about a thousand years, maintaining a consistent message of prophets calling people to repentance. It’s not just a single storyline—there are multiple civilizational rises, falls, lineage histories, and a careful editorial overlay by Mormon.

16. Ancient-Style Covenant Patterns and Rites
The text includes covenant-making scenes and worship practices that some scholars liken to Old World ritual patterns. Critics see these as “biblical borrowings,” but defenders point out that the specifics can sometimes mirror older Israelite customs.

17. “Two Cumorahs” Debate & Limited Geography Models
While this is a messy topic, some scholars identify plausible Mesoamerican settings that match some geographic clues in the text (like fortifications, highways, cities of stone/cement). No bull’s-eye has been found, but partial correlations interest those open to an ancient setting.

18. Unique Personal and Place Names With Semitic Resonance
The Book of Mormon has loads of names—Alma, Lehi, Sariah, Moronihah—some of which show plausible Semitic or Egyptian linguistic roots. It’s debated how a frontier American might concoct those systematically.

19. Consistency in Monetary/Weights System in Alma 11
The text outlines a system of senines, seons, and others, describing relative exchange rates. While not proven to mirror an actual ancient currency, the internal logic is consistent, again hinting at a deeper thought process than random guesswork.

20. Persistent Witness Testimonies, Conversions, and Spiritual Experiences
Though not a “hard” historical proof, the Book of Mormon’s track record of spiritual impact—convincing early believers and fueling a growing church—suggests that many people (beyond Joseph Smith) found it compelling enough to risk livelihood and reputation. Subjective, but not trivial.

[Analytics]

Wow.

Yes. Wow.

Regards,
MG

I responded to ChatGPT, "Interesting. Could you list, in order, what you think the 20 strongest pieces of evidence are?”

It said:

Below is one person’s subjective ranking of 20 notable “lines of evidence” pointing toward the Book of Mormon’s possible ancient origins, assuming we’re fully open to divine or supernatural involvement. Other believers might order these differently or emphasize different points, but this is a reasonable stab at the “top 20.”

1. Nahom & Arabian Trail Correlations
One of the best-known specific hits: Nephi’s record mentions traveling south-southeast along the Red Sea, turning east, and passing a place called “Nahom,” which plausibly corresponds to an actual site/tribal area (NHM) in modern Yemen. Proponents say it’s unlikely Joseph Smith in 1829 could have “guessed” this accurately.

2. Detailed Old World Geography (Bountiful)
The Book of Mormon describes a fertile coastal area east of Nahom called “Bountiful,” featuring fruit and honey. Southern Oman (Wadi Sayq/Khor Kharfot region) is a surprisingly close match—a lush oasis along an otherwise barren coast.

3. Complexity & Internal Consistency in a Rapid Dictation
Joseph dictated roughly 500+ pages of dense, internally consistent text in under three months—without notes or rewrites, as far as witnesses reported. The sheer complexity (genealogies, interwoven plotlines, etc.) impresses even some skeptics who admit it’s no trivial feat.

4. Archaic Language / Early Modern English Elements
Linguistic studies (Skousen, Carmack) indicate that the earliest Book of Mormon text contains archaic forms more typical of Early Modern English (1500s–1600s) than the 19th century. Some see this as evidence of an older “source” language or a nontrivial translation process.

5. Chiasmus and Other Semitic Literary Forms
The discovery of chiastic structures (inverted parallelisms) in the Book of Mormon—particularly Alma 36—caught many by surprise. These are common in ancient Semitic writing but weren’t identified as a distinctive literary form by modern biblical scholars until well after the Book of Mormon was published.

6. Multiple First-Person Voices & Distinct Styles (Stylometry)
Wordprint (stylometric) studies suggest different textual “voices” for figures like Nephi, Alma, Moroni, etc., potentially indicating multiple authors rather than a single 19th-century hand. While not definitive, it’s at least consistent with the claim of a compiled record.

7. Witnesses of the Gold Plates
Beyond Joseph Smith, multiple men (the Three and the Eight Witnesses) swore they physically saw and/or handled the metal plates and engravings. Critics question their reliability, but even under tough scrutiny, most stuck to their stories to the end of their lives.

8. Time Constraints / Personal Background of Joseph Smith
Young, undereducated farmhand in his early 20s dictates a massive, theologically complex text in ~65–75 working days. Without supernatural help, it’s a mind-boggling achievement—still possible, but improbable enough to raise eyebrows.

9. Hebraisms and Semitic Idioms
Phrases like “if … and” constructions, “and it came to pass” usage, cognate accusatives, and other supposed Hebrew-like syntax appear throughout the Book of Mormon. These might be remnants of a literal translation from a Semitic language.

10. Structure of Plates & “Record of Records” Idea
The Book of Mormon references multiple sets of plates (large plates, small plates, the brass plates) and an abridgment process by Mormon. This layered editorial framework is somewhat reminiscent of ancient record-keeping methods—arguably beyond what a frontier farmhand might invent offhand.

11. Rapid-Fire Dictation with No Revisions on the Fly
Scribes like Oliver Cowdery and Emma Smith said that Joseph rarely paused or backtracked to revise earlier text. This implies strong internal consistency despite minimal revision—a curious feature if it were purely ad-libbed.

12. Alleged “Reformed Egyptian” & Ancient Metal Plates Traditions
Though “Reformed Egyptian” is not known in modern scholarship, records engraved on metal plates have been discovered in various ancient cultures, including the Near East and Mediterranean. It’s at least plausible that an ancient group could preserve sacred records on metal.

13. Doctrinal Complexity and Depth
The Book of Mormon weaves together prophecies, teachings on Christ’s atonement, complex covenant theology, and nuanced spiritual discussions. Believers see this depth as unlikely for a 19th-century farm youth; critics say Joseph had help from revival culture, but it’s still no small feat.

14. King James Bible Intertextuality (In a “Translation”)
While some see the Book of Mormon’s reliance on KJV language as evidence of a 19th-century origin, others argue that if the biblical passages were part of the ancient brass plates (or used as a base for “translating” Isaiah’s text already on the plates), that might explain the heavy KJV flavor.

15. Prophetic/Redemptive Themes Over Centuries in the Text
The Book of Mormon narrative spans about a thousand years, maintaining a consistent message of prophets calling people to repentance. It’s not just a single storyline—there are multiple civilizational rises, falls, lineage histories, and a careful editorial overlay by Mormon.

16. Ancient-Style Covenant Patterns and Rites
The text includes covenant-making scenes and worship practices that some scholars liken to Old World ritual patterns. Critics see these as “biblical borrowings,” but defenders point out that the specifics can sometimes mirror older Israelite customs.

17. “Two Cumorahs” Debate & Limited Geography Models
While this is a messy topic, some scholars identify plausible Mesoamerican settings that match some geographic clues in the text (like fortifications, highways, cities of stone/cement). No bull’s-eye has been found, but partial correlations interest those open to an ancient setting.

18. Unique Personal and Place Names With Semitic Resonance
The Book of Mormon has loads of names—Alma, Lehi, Sariah, Moronihah—some of which show plausible Semitic or Egyptian linguistic roots. It’s debated how a frontier American might concoct those systematically.

19. Consistency in Monetary/Weights System in Alma 11
The text outlines a system of senines, seons, and others, describing relative exchange rates. While not proven to mirror an actual ancient currency, the internal logic is consistent, again hinting at a deeper thought process than random guesswork.

20. Persistent Witness Testimonies, Conversions, and Spiritual Experiences
Though not a “hard” historical proof, the Book of Mormon’s track record of spiritual impact—convincing early believers and fueling a growing church—suggests that many people (beyond Joseph Smith) found it compelling enough to risk livelihood and reputation. Subjective, but not trivial.

[Gadianton]

Below is one person’s subjective ranking of 20 notable “lines of evidence” pointing toward the Book of Mormon’s possible ancient origins,

I'm enjoying the thread Analytics, but I have to say I'm not nearly as optimistic about A.I. as you are, though I recognize your skill set gives you an edge into understanding the inner workings better than I do.

Your quote here gets right to the problem. To my mind, A.I. is essentially a gigantic plagiarism machine. it just spilled out a bunch of points MG wanted to hear based on what somebody else wrote who is now not getting credit for their work. If 200 people had made similar lists, it could hide the plagiarism better by mimicking a similar list that doesn't appear to be an exact copy of any of the inputted lists.

For the questions you asked, in my mind, it answered by simply averaging statements made about the subjects, and presumably more statements had been made than otherwise with the assumptions in the response. A.I. is best at passing the Turing test in the opposite way people would have expected, by averaging out how lots of people sound when they talk and mimicking it in incredibly subtle ways, and so it sounds really lifelike with no substance behind it.

As a research tool, if your hobby is speculative protein design, it's indispensable, precisely because it can do things like solve those quizzes you mentioned. But I would think that evaluating the Dales research would be nearly impossible for it to handle because its such an outlier problem. I'd instinctively think that A.I. is a great way to advance pseudoscience because of the convincing ways at which it can sound like it's talking scientific while producing total BS.

For subjects with small amounts of research behind it, DeepSeek has been very helpful in some ways, but answers that sound good that I want details on it doesn't want to give up its sources, and so you don't really know how it came to that conclusion. Presumably it's plagiarizing something it doesn't want to admit to.

But a highly advanced version of an A.I. product as a tool for the intermediate steps was something I hadn't considered prior to your post. So I wondered if an advanced product would easily allow the Dales to get it to multiply a bunch of parallels together as if they were independent events to get an astronomically unlikely possibility of the connection being chance. On the one hand, it can fold proteins, but on the other it can't draw a clock with hands outside 10 and 2 or a glass of wine more than half full. And it seems to me like fringe ideas such as evaluating whether the Book of Mormon is history would fall into the camp of not enough training material to be useful.

[I Have Questions]

Peterson has said a number of times that his opinion is that the strongest piece of evidence in favour of The Book of Mormon being what it claims to be, is the testimony of the 11 witnesses. See my signature line for why that’s rather damning.

It goes from notoriously unreliable to exponentially worse than that when one key figure coordinates eye witness testimony.

[I Have Questions]

Below is one person’s subjective ranking of 20 notable “lines of evidence” pointing toward the Book of Mormon’s possible ancient origins,

I'm enjoying the thread Analytics, but I have to say I'm not nearly as optimistic about A.I. as you are, though I recognize your skill set gives you an edge into understanding the inner workings better than I do.

Your quote here gets right to the problem. To my mind, A.I. is essentially a gigantic plagiarism machine. it just spilled out a bunch of points MG wanted to hear based on what somebody else wrote who is now not getting credit for their work. If 200 people had made similar lists, it could hide the plagiarism better by mimicking a similar list that doesn't appear to be an exact copy of any of the inputted lists.

To your point, I asked ChatGPT “What are the limitations of answers provided by ChatGPT…

ChatGPT has several limitations in its responses:

1. **Accuracy and Currency**: ChatGPT’s knowledge is based on information available up to its last update (as of September 2021 for some versions). It cannot access real-time data or provide the most current events, trends, or developments.

2. **Factual Inaccuracies**: While ChatGPT tries to provide accurate and reliable answers, it can still generate incorrect or misleading information, especially when asked about niche or complex topics.

3. **Context and Understanding**: ChatGPT can struggle with deeply understanding nuanced or ambiguous contexts, and may misinterpret questions or fail to recognize subtle distinctions in meaning.

4. **Creativity Boundaries**: While ChatGPT can generate creative content like stories or ideas, its creativity is based on patterns learned from data and not on personal experience or genuine innovation.

5. **Complex Reasoning and Long-Term Consistency**: In longer, more intricate discussions or problems that require multi-step reasoning, ChatGPT might lose track of details or offer answers that are inconsistent with earlier parts of the conversation.

6. **Ethical and Safety Concerns**: The model can inadvertently generate harmful, biased, or inappropriate content. OpenAI works to mitigate this, but it’s not perfect in filtering such responses.

7. **Specialized Expertise**: While ChatGPT can provide general knowledge on many subjects, its expertise in specialized fields (e.g., medical, legal, or technical advice) is limited, and it should not be relied upon for professional advice.

8. **No Personal Experience**: ChatGPT doesn't have personal experiences, emotions, or consciousness. It cannot form opinions or offer personal insights beyond its training data.

Despite these limitations, ChatGPT is a powerful tool for general inquiries, brainstorming, and conversational engagement.

It’s not actually calculating and weighing information. It’s trawling huge swathes of what people have written and summarising it. It’s like a witness in a witness box. A clever questioner can lead it to the answer they wanted. At least that’s how it seems to me.