For those who dismiss the Book of Mormon, what's your explanation for it?

[scottie]

Props to JS for having the foresight to surreptitiously produce the BOM in such a way as to withstand intense scrutiny and speculation without leaving a trace of his secret.

[SoonerCoug]

You crack me up -- you did NOT pick that excerpt at random.
.

I swear to Darwin that I picked it completely at random. I was clicking randomly through the online scriptures. That was the first chapter I chose, and I pasted it without even reading it.

[old_gregg]

by the way, the massive amount of word for word kjv content probably doesn't help the "not a made up book" argument.

[SeattleUte]

The thread on whether God exists, and several of the responses, rekindled a persistent question I have that is rarely directly answered.

For those who don't believe that the Book of Mormon is from God, what's your explanation for it? As far as I can see, the only explanation is that Joseph Smith was a crazed genius who wrote it in 75 days (copying several chunks from the KJV of the Bible).

Kind of like when Cormac McCarthy wrote The Road in 60 days -- except much more impressive from an output point of view.

None of this historicity crap of a mealy-mouthed middle-ground either. Either it's from God, or it's the work of a mad man.

So for those who reject it's from God, you obviously think Joseph Smith could have written it in 75 or so days.

This is not an interesting subject and it's not mysterious. Literary frauds especially in a religous context are bounteous. We still see discovered or announced numerous iterations of the Gospels, the Gospel of Judas, etc. A number of Paul's canonized letters have been revealed as forgeries. Apparently you think the canonized Gospels themselves are genuine histories wrought by eyewitnesses to the turning of water into wine, raising Lazerus from the dead and the Resurection? These days educated people don't tend to believe that. I would expect more from you, and in fact regard this as a crude troll.

Here is a notorious literary fruad from the Renaissance that resembles to an uncanny extent but is a lot more impressive than JS's, and done by someone a lot younger:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/bo.../16WILLSL.html

Sooner is right that the BOM is not hugely impressive as a literary work. Harold Bloom coined the phrase "religious genius" in reference to Joseph Smith, but he wasn't refering to the Book of Mormon. Most impressive about JS is his fantastic life. Among JS's literary works Harold Bloom is wowed essentially only by the King Follet sermon.

If you apply scholarly analysis to the Book of Mormon it doesn't appear an ancient record in any way. For starters there's all of that text copied straight from the King James Version of the Bible. lol

[Levin]

by the way, the massive amount of word for word kjv content probably doesn't help the "not a made up book" argument.

No, it doesn't. But connecting the Savior's "other sheep" explanation in 3rd Nephi to the passage in the NT took some ingenuity. I'm sure Joseph was thrilled when he realized he could make that connection. I wonder if when plotting it out that's one reason he chose a different continent instead of just a new found gospel from the Holy Land or something like that.

[CardiacCoug]

by the way, the massive amount of word for word kjv content probably doesn't help the "not a made up book" argument.

And Joseph made sure a privacy curtain was in between him and the transcribers because he definitely did NOT use any notes while dictating.

Kind of funny that they don't allow kids at the BYU testing center to have a privacy curtain then, since it is not at all suspicious.

[SeattleUte]

No, it doesn't. But connecting the Savior's "other sheep" explanation in 3rd Nephi to the passage in the NT took some ingenuity. I'm sure Joseph was thrilled when he realized he could make that connection. I wonder if when plotting it out that's one reason he chose a different continent instead of just a new found gospel from the Holy Land or something like that.

troll

[CardiacCoug]

No, it doesn't. But connecting the Savior's "other sheep" explanation in 3rd Nephi to the passage in the NT took some ingenuity. I'm sure Joseph was thrilled when he realized he could make that connection. I wonder if when plotting it out that's one reason he chose a different continent instead of just a new found gospel from the Holy Land or something like that.

He did the new found Gospel from the Holy Land thing a little later with some papyri, I believe.

[TripletDaddy]

This is not an interesting subject and it's not mysterious. Literary frauds especially in a religous context are bounteous. We still see discovered or announced numerous iterations of the Gospels, the Gospel of Judas, etc. A number of Paul's canonized letters have been revealed as forgeries. Apparently you think the canonized Gospels themselves are genuine histories wrought by eyewitnesses to the turning of wine into water, raising Lazerus from the dead and the Resurection? These days educated people don't tend to believe that. I would expect more from you, and in fact regard this as a crude troll.

Here is a notorious literary fruad from the Renaissance that resembles to an uncanny extent but is a lot more impressive than JS's, and done by someone a lot younger:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/bo.../16WILLSL.html

Professor Karen King of the Harvard Divinity School agrees with you.

[old_gregg]

No, it doesn't. But connecting the Savior's "other sheep" explanation in 3rd Nephi to the passage in the NT took some ingenuity. I'm sure Joseph was thrilled when he realized he could make that connection. I wonder if when plotting it out that's one reason he chose a different continent instead of just a new found gospel from the Holy Land or something like that.

maybe. i am convinced he was an astonishingly brilliant and charming person, and the uneducated backwoods farm boy who couldn't even write a letter schtick is tiresome. those kinds of people do not drop things like the follett discourse or much of what's contained in the pogp. he was probably prone to some embellishment and had a creative enough mind that it got him in trouble at times. i don't think he acted maliciously, though.

[CardiacCoug]

No, it doesn't. But connecting the Savior's "other sheep" explanation in 3rd Nephi to the passage in the NT took some ingenuity. I'm sure Joseph was thrilled when he realized he could make that connection. I wonder if when plotting it out that's one reason he chose a different continent instead of just a new found gospel from the Holy Land or something like that.

What about when Joseph put himself right into the Book of Mormon? That was very cool. Chutzpah!

[Non Sequitur]

For starters there's all of that text copied straight from the King James Version of the Bible. lol

We've all had plenty of days at work when we just dialed it in.

[Northwestcoug]

Nice, but no basis in anything.

Paanchi, Korihor, Pahoran and Hermounts - all BOM names - just sound made up - like yours. But they are real examples of the book's "Egypticity" (reflecting Palestine's extensive cultural and economic ties to Egypt in the period).

Paankhi turns out to be an Egyptian name in the seventh century B.C. and Korihor turns up in both Egyptian and Asiatic derivatives. Givens notes that "in this regard, it is well worth noting that William Foxwell Albright, doyen of American ancient Near Eastern Studies wrote to a critic seeking to debunk Smith's writings that:



"Hermounts" meanwhile - in the BoM a wild country of the borderlands - bears a striking similarity to the Egyptian "Hermonthis" (the land of Month, god of wild places and things).

If you're going to argue for the supposed Egyptian influences in the BOM, then don't forget the document that came directly from Egypt. I'm sure these names have strong egyptian ties as well:

Hah-ko-kau-beam. Kli-flos-is-es. Jah-oh-eh. Oliblish. Raukeeyang. Enish-go-on-dosh. Floeese. Kae-e-vanrash

[Levin]

These days educated people don't tend to believe that. I would expect more from you, and in fact regard this as a crude troll.

Flattery has always been your most devious -- but blunt -- weapon.

Not a troll, though I'm playing along some here.

I'm sincerely curious what people think the mechanics of the fraud were given what we know how the text of the BofM came about.

I'm not bothered by the KJV passages.

[SeattleUte]

We've all had plenty of days at work when we just dialed it in.

Another lol.