Historicity of The Book of Mormon

[Joe Public]

It's pretty crass, but there's the old atheist example of not having to prove that there isn't a pink elephant god in someone's trunk just because they say so. If the only evidence for the existence of the pink elephant god in someone's trunk is people saying that there's a pink elephant god in someone's trunk, then Occam's Razor allows us to assert with near certainty, that, absent any demonstrable evidence, there is not a pink elephant god in someone's trunk.

[LA Ute]

No, not in the least bit. It's really quite simple logic, especially when you read the following sentence, where he asks for evidence.

It's pretty crass, but there's the old atheist example of not having to prove that there isn't a pink elephant god in someone's trunk just because they say so. If the only evidence for the existence of the pink elephant god in someone's trunk is people saying that there's a pink elephant god in someone's trunk, then Occam's Razor allows us to assert with near certainty, that, absent any demonstrable evidence, there is not a pink elephant god in someone's trunk.

A few thoughts:

First, your points are well-made and well-taken. Civil, too, which is always welcome.

Second, we are all showing our training. Lawyers are taught very early in our professional lives that evidence and proof don't establish whether something actually happened or did not happen, but only permit formal legal conclusions as to whether something was proven in a legal sense. For example, "not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent." Or the old saw, "I can bring 100 witnesses who did not see the accident, but what they think is inconsequential as a matter of proof." So when someone says it is incontrovertible that something did not exist or did not happen, my lawyer mind rebels against that.

Finally, Jenkins is talking about theological matters and religious belief, not purely historical/philosophical matters. I guess we could say it is incontrovertible that Adam and Eve never existed either, but that kind of misses the point.

So we can agree to disagree.

P.S. I am not defending Rappleye. I think efforts to prove the historicity of the BofM are silly.

[Solon]

A few thoughts:

First, your points are well-made and well-taken. Civil, too, which is always welcome.

Second, we are all showing our training. Lawyers are taught very early in our professional lives that evidence and proof don't establish whether something actually happened or did not happen, but only permit formal legal conclusions as to whether something was proven in a legal sense. For example, "not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent." Or the old saw, "I can bring 100 witnesses who did not see the accident, but what they think is inconsequential as a matter of proof." So when someone says it is incontrovertible that something did not exist or did not happen, my lawyer mind rebels against that.

Finally, Jenkins is talking about theological matters and religious belief, not purely historical/philosophical matters. I guess we could say it is incontrovertible that Adam and Eve never existed either, but that kind of misses the point.

So we can agree to disagree.

P.S. I am not defending Rappleye. I think efforts to prove the historicity of the BofM are silly.

I spent a couple of hours last night reading the whole back-and-forth. I thought Jenkins was pretty civil about not attacking LDS belief or faith; only attacking the apologist claims to literal BoM historicity - claims that he suspects the rank-and-file Mormons don't really care about, nor would care to make.

In his words (I summarize), nobody is becoming a Mormon because they suddenly learn that the mound-builders of Ohio came from Jerusalem originally. It's a non-issue for most members & proselytes.
The Book of Mormon as a book of divine nature with spiritual meaning & lessons is not something he wants to contend with.

[SandYFan]

How BYU Destroyed Ancient Book of Mormon Studies

Although many people might find it incredible, every single BYU administrator on every level of the administration has explicitly discouraged me from doing ancient Book of Mormon studies in my annual performance (“stewardship”) reviews. They have all explicitly told me to focus my research and publications on non-Book of Mormon topics, such as the crusades. In part this was good advice on their part; they were telling me if you want to be successful at BYU, don’t publish on the Book of Mormon or publish with FARMS or later Interpreter.

[SandYFan]

Has cesletter.com been discussed here yet? I can't recall reading about it before. It's basically a laundry list of concerns about the church from someone who says they were super active in the church until they learned about all this stuff.

[kccougar]

Has cesletter.com been discussed here yet? I can't recall reading about it before. It's basically a laundry list of concerns about the church from someone who says they were super active in the church until they learned about all this stuff.

Yes, and it was received about like John Dehlin here. A few twitterpated posters sang its praises while a more reasoned examination found it to be disingenuous. So then previous fans have to now pretend they never really thought that much of it to begin with.

[SandYFan]

Yes, and it was received about like John Dehlin here. A few twitterpated posters sang its praises while a more reasoned examination found it to be disingenuous. So then previous fans have to now pretend they never really thought that much of it to begin with.

Thanks. I'll do a better search for the discussion.

[pellegrino]

Yes, and it was received about like John Dehlin here. A few twitterpated posters sang its praises while a more reasoned examination found it to be disingenuous. So then previous fans have to now pretend they never really thought that much of it to begin with.

I must have missed that conversation. Most of the issues in the ces letter were discussed and debated long before it ever existed.

[Shaka]

It's making its rounds on Facebook today. Some of my friends that have left the church are sharing it. Kind of lame considering its conference weekend.

[SandYFan]

I must have missed that conversation. Most of the issues in the ces letter were discussed and debated long before it ever existed.

This seems accurate. I can't find a thread or discussion explicitly about the letter, but the topics contained are definitely discussed throughout The Foyer.

I'm less interested in the disingenousness of the letter and more interested in the accuracy of the statements made.

From what I have gathered from this site:

1. Joseph was sealed to other women, some of whom were married to men at the time. Whether or not he consummated those sealings is not 100% determined.

2. The Book of Abraham's translated papyrus are 100% complete innacurate as determined my modern-day Egyptologists.

3.The Kinderhook plates were created in the 19th century, and definitely not of ancient origin, as Joseph had stated.

4. The language of the Book of Mormon is very similar to that used in other publications from prior to 1820.

5. There are similarities between the names of places/geographic features near where Joseph grew up and names of places\geographic features of lands in the Book of Mormon.

6. As the Church has recently clarified, Joseph used a seer stone inside a hat to bring forth the Book of Mormon. The gold plates had no utility in the process.

There's more, but you get the idea. I'm not interested in persuading anyone of anything; I just want to understand.

[Commando]

It's making its rounds on Facebook today. Some of my friends that have left the church are sharing it. Kind of lame considering its conference weekend.

Yeah- I had a friend that had was facing some adversity, had hard time w his goal of getting out on a mission and eventually called it quits. The so called CES letter was basically the excuse.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Thanks. I'll do a better search for the discussion.

Do a search on "ces letter" (in quotes). Tons of hits.

Lots of discussion in the John Dehlin thread. A couple examples:

http://www.cougarstadium.com/showthr...=1#post1181467

http://www.cougarstadium.com/showthr...er#post1181408

[SandYFan]

Do a search on "ces letter" (in quotes). Tons of hits.

Lots of discussion in the John Dehlin thread. A couple examples:

Thank you.

[SandYFan]

Do a search on "ces letter" (in quotes). Tons of hits.

Lots of discussion in the John Dehlin thread. A couple examples:

http://www.cougarstadium.com/showthr...=1#post1181467

http://www.cougarstadium.com/showthr...er#post1181408

SandYFan, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

[Jeff Lebowski]

SandYFan, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Ha. Whoops, sorry those links are to a private thread. Although I have no reason why that is a private thread. Let me do some digging.