Posted on 04/27/2006 3:03:34 PM PDT by restornu
The Book of Mormon is often dismissed as gibberish by those who have never taken the trouble to read it. In fact, its very existence poses a serious puzzle if it is not what it claims to be - an ancient record. Below is the Book of Mormon Challenge, an assignment that Professor Hugh Nibley at BYU sometimes gave to students in a required class on the Book of Mormon. The following text is taken from the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.8, Ch.11, Pg.221 - Pg.222:
Since Joseph Smith was younger than most of you and not nearly so experienced or well-educated as any of you at the time he copyrighted the Book of Mormon, it should not be too much to ask you to hand in by the end of the semester (which will give you more time than he had) a paper of, say, five to six hundred pages in length. Call it a sacred book if you will, and give it the form of a history. Tell of a community of wandering Jews in ancient times; have all sorts of characters in your story, and involve them in all sorts of public and private vicissitudes; give them names--hundreds of them--pretending that they are real Hebrew and Egyptian names of circa 600 b.c.; be lavish with cultural and technical details--manners and customs, arts and industries, political and religious institutions, rites, and traditions, include long and complicated military and economic histories; have your narrative cover a thousand years without any large gaps; keep a number of interrelated local histories going at once; feel free to introduce religious controversy and philosophical discussion, but always in a plausible setting; observe the appropriate literary conventions and explain the derivation and transmission of your varied historical materials.
Above all, do not ever contradict yourself! For now we come to the really hard part of this little assignment. You and I know that you are making this all up--we have our little joke--but just the same you are going to be required to have your paper published when you finish it, not as fiction or romance, but as a true history! After you have handed it in you may make no changes in it (in this class we always use the first edition of the Book of Mormon); what is more, you are to invite any and all scholars to read and criticize your work freely, explaining to them that it is a sacred book on a par with the Bible. If they seem over-skeptical, you might tell them that you translated the book from original records by the aid of the Urim and Thummim--they will love that! Further to allay their misgivings, you might tell them that the original manuscript was on golden plates, and that you got the plates from an angel. Now go to work and good luck!
To date no student has carried out this assignment, which, of course, was not meant seriously. But why not? If anybody could write the Book of Mormon, as we have been so often assured, it is high time that somebody, some devoted and learned minister of the gospel, let us say, performed the invaluable public service of showing the world that it can be done." - Hugh Nibley
Structure and Complexity of the Book of Mormon First Nephi gives us first a clear and vivid look at the world of Lehi, a citizen of Jerusalem but much at home in the general world of the New East of 600 B.C. Then it takes us to the desert, where Lehi and his family wander for eight years, doing all the things that wandering families in the desert should do. The manner of their crossing the ocean is described, as is the first settlement and hard pioneer life in the New World dealt with.... The book of Mosiah describes a coronation rite in all its details and presents extensive religious and political histories mixed in with a complicated background of exploration and colonization. The book of Alma is marked by long eschatological discourses and a remarkably full and circumstantial military history. The main theme of the book of Helaman is the undermining of society by moral decay and criminal conspiracy; the powerful essay on crime is carried into the next book, where the ultimate dissolution of the Nephite government is described.
Then comes the account of the great storm and earthquakes, in which the writer, ignoring a splendid opportunity for exaggeration, has as accurately depicted the typical behavior of the elements on such occasions as if he were copying out of a modern textbook on seismology.... [Soon] after the catastrophe, Jesus Christ appeared to the most pious sectaries who had gathered at the temple.
...Can anyone now imagine the terrifying prospect of confronting the Christian world of 1830 with the very words of Christ? ...
But the boldness of the thing is matched by the directness and nobility with which the preaching of the Savior and the organization of the church are described. After this comes a happy history and then the usual signs of decline and demoralization. The death-struggle of the Nephite civilization is described with due attention to all the complex factors that make up an exceedingly complicated but perfectly consistent picture of decline and fall. Only one who attempts to make a full outline of Book of Mormon history can begin to appreciate its immense complexity; and never once does the author get lost (as the student repeatedly does, picking his way out of one maze after another only with the greatest effort), and never once does he contradict himself. We should be glad to learn of any other like performance in the history of literature. - Hugh Nibley, Collected Works Vol. 8
The four types of biblical experts There are four kinds of biblical experts: At the very top are the professionals who have been doing biblical research all their adult lives. They are usually professors in leading universities in various fields that are related to the Bible such as archaeologists, historians, paleographers, professors of the Bible, and professors of Near Eastern languages and literature.
These people are the most credible of all biblical experts and do not let religious views get in the way of the truth. This is why a lot of them consider themselves to be nonbelievers in the modern Christian and Jewish faiths. Their reputation and standing in the academic community is very important to them. This causes them to be cautious and not rashly declare statements upon any subject without presenting verifiable proof for their claims. It is to them that encyclopedias, journals and universities go to for information. Their community is very small, but extremely influential in the secular world. One distinctive feature of this group is the difficulty outsiders face when reading their writings which causes them to be a fairly closed society.
The second group of biblical experts are those who have legitimate degrees and may have initially been in the first group but were spurned by the first group for being unreliable because they disregard demonstrable proof simply because their religious convictions teach otherwise. For them, their religion's teaching overrides real biblical research. Very few of them can be considered Fundamentalists.
The third group of biblical experts are the "biblical experts." These people disregard the works and conclusions of the first group, and view the second group as their mentors. Nearly all anti-Mormons who produce anti-Mormon paraphernalia fall into this group. Their views are purely theological and display ignorance of legitimate biblical studies. Their arguments are non-rational and are frequently sensational hype and empty rhetoric. These people are very vocal and constantly parade their "expertise" upon the unknowing masses by giving seminars in various churches and religious schools. Nearly all of them are Fundamentalists.
The fourth group of "biblical experts" are those who have never read the Bible completely and do not even know the history and contents of the Bible. They are completely reliant upon materials produced by the third group and may have five verses in the Bible memorized to quote at people they encounter (in nearly every instance John 3:16 and John 14:6 are included in these five verses) to give the impression they are experts in the Bible. They usually need the Table of Contents to find various biblical books and are extremely vocal in their condemnation of Mormonism. They personify the wise adage:
The less knowledge a man has, the more vocal he is about his expertise.
They read an anti-Mormon book and suddenly they're experts on Mormonism:
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
The remainder of Christians are those who believe in the Bible but never read it. The Bible is a very complex book for most Christians and seems to possess a power that intimidates them. This is why a normal Christian is impressed whenever he or she encounters an individual who can quote scripture. It is this ignorance of the Bible that causes some to proclaim themselves "biblical experts."
I am not aware of anyone in the first group of biblical experts who are anti-Mormon. If anything, real biblical scholars who know Mormon theology have a profound sense of admiration for it and are usually astonished that so many facets of Mormonism reflect authentic biblical teachings.
They are frequently puzzled at how Joseph Smith could find out the real biblical teaching since modern Judaism and Christianity abandoned them thousands of years ago. Uniquely Mormon doctrines such as the anthropomorphic nature of God, the divine nature and deification potential of man, the plurality of deities, the divine sanction of polygamy, the fallacy of sola scriptura, the superiority of the charismatic leaders over the ecclesiastical leaders and their importance, the inconsequence of Original Sin because of the Atonement of Christ, the importance of contemporary revelation, and so forth are all original Jewish and Christian thought before they were abandoned mainly due to Greek philosophical influence.
Mormonism to these scholars is the only faith that preserves the characteristics of the early chosen people. This doesn’t mean these scholars believe Mormonism is the true religion, since their studies are on an intellectual level instead of a spiritual one.
On the other hand, the leaders of the anti-Mormon movement are nearly all in the third category with a couple in the second. Real biblical experts (who aren’t Mormon) and are in the first category normally refer to the “biblical experts” in the third group as the “know-nothings” or the “Fundamentalist know-nothings.” These terms aren’t completely derogatory, but are accurate descriptions of the knowledge of the “biblical experts” in the third group. Ed Watson - Mormonism: Faith of the 21st Century
One way to understand authority & submission (the two ends of lordship) is to first look @ it through the eyes of marriage.
Christ submitted to death & more on our behalf. Likewise, Eph. 5:25 says husbands should submit to ultimate sacrifices on behalf of wives. It's a form of submission. Eph. 5 talks about mutual submission in a husband-wife relationship (Eph. 5:24ff). Submission is not the negative concept feminists have made it out to be; it's a divine practice within God, Himself. Jesus on his knees washing the disciples' feet was not the first time He submitted; it's what He's done from eternity. As Lord, He didn't grasp after authority, even though He had the "right" to do so. He waited until He was granted the exercise of all of it. (Matt 28:18-20).
Lastly, you can't understand this concept unless you grasp something of Philippians 2:6-7: "Who, being in the very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness..."
There was a 4/25/06 thread on the LDS Church posted by Utah Girl. On post #53, I responded to a comment by Utah Girl, who wrote:
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have worked hard to pass initiatives across America to preserve marriage to be between a man and a woman. We have worked in conjunction with our friends and neighbors and with other faiths who have the goal: to preserve traditional marriage.
My response to Utah Girl was: This is a true statement. I know LDS were prominent in helping to pass Prop 22 in California. So it is good that LDS have been willing, from their leadership on down, to be on the forefront of this issue. It is indeed commendable.
I have to ask you....
Why in the world do you continue to spark debate on this subject....And then wonder why you are getting fires?
The apostle Paul had three priorities worth emulating:
(1) He followed up on previous churches he started (hence the NT epistles).
(2) He desired to go where the gospel had not been preached (Rom. 15:20).
(3) Paul hung out where the religious folks were. In fact, he made it a priority whenever he arrived in a new area: "As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures..." (Acts 17:2...see also Acts 19:8). Apollos did the same thing, speaking boldly where the religious people were (the synagogue)--see Acts 18:24-28. Apollos "vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures..." (Acts 18:28).
If unsaved Jews were hanging out @ the synagogue, Paul prioritized that as a good location to go. If unsaved religious folks are hanging out at different posts today, we can be like Paul and go where they are.
The title of this thread is Book of Mormon Challenge which no one is interested in discussing...
or staying on topics
It always wants to go to more shock jock methods...
There are more here the same old hostile X-ers and it is the way things work
2 Nephi 2
11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.
12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.
So, you're telling me that when "anyone says to you, 'Look here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!'" (Matt 24:23), we are to believe that, 'cause there's only one Christ? Sorry, you flunked the Matt 24 test:
"do not believe it," says Jesus, "For false Christs and false prophets will appear..." (Matt 24:23-24).
Paul talks about "another" Jesus in Gal. 1:8.
How can your Jesus, who did not Create anything out of nothing, be my Jesus, the creator of all things and all beings?
How can your Jesus, who is the spirit brother of Lucipher, be my Jesus, who created Lucipher?
How can your Jesus, whose blood was so anemic that not only is Calvary almost irrelevant (LDS' belief that Jesus atoned for sin by sweating blood in Garden) but that it paid only for Adam's sin but not for your personal sin or my personal sin...be compared to the all-purifying nature of Christ's blood on the cross--a cross strangely missing from the LDS facilities' landscape?
How can your Jesus, one most LDS say they don't even pray to, be compared to my Jesus who loves to hear me pray [I mean, even the Nephite disciples prayed to Jesus!!!].
How can your Jesus, who LDS apostle Bruce R. McConkie told BYU students @ a devotional in the 1980s that they should not seek a special personal relationship with, be compared to my Jesus who said the very nature of eternal life was defined by knowing Him (John 17:3)?
Let's face it. Don't make me dig up the quote. But even Ensign Magazine years ago said that the Christian church "worships a different Jesus" than LDS do.
I'm sorry. But you can't claim special revelations coming down from on high in Ensign magazine, only for other Ensign mag comments to be totally disregarded by you.
LDS are the ones who make the huge deal out of having a priesthood. And this is because LDS authority is perceived to be so wrapped up in it. Therefore, the laying on of hands is indeed huge in Utah & the LDS concentric circle. The rite of passing on authority is LDS' own construction, so don't tell me that I'm making a spurious argument when so much rides on that for LDS.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard an LDS missionary talk with pride about his priesthood authority, and either in subtle or more open ways point out that he perceives a vacuum of authority within "Christendom."
I mean, just look, for example, at how many times in this thread alone you bring up the question of how/where we're authorized to several posters. It's even in your blood!
The chain of authority within the LDS is huge. How dare you make light of it or downplay it.
Wow! Maybe you should don a white shirt & tie and go door to door trying this track record of this winsome style you've got. Let's see, you labeled me as a "bitter, twisted individual" in a previous thread--having set eyes on just a few postings of mine (I believe it was the very first thread you commented on that I had done as well) and now this comment toward ColorCountry?
You can call it, "BTV evangelism" [BTV for "Bitter-Twisted-Vindictive") and just go 'round spittin' labels on folks and wow! just watch 'em warm up all cozy to ya. How do ya do it?
Yeah, we all know that used car salesmen are the perfect 100% trusted sources of information on the cars they sell! Go to them and never mind consumer mags weighing different autos, never mind bringing your own mechanic in to evaluate a car.
But the D&C says the BoM contains "the fullness of the everlasting gospel." Therefore, whatever 2/3rds is missing, it's of secondary importance.
So, why are some of the most important LDS doctrines, if indeed they are part of the LDS gospel, not to be found in the BoM? Why are they only found in the D&C? (I thought the BoM, and not the D&C, is the fullness of the everlasting gospel)?
The book I was refering to is The History of the Church by Joseph Smith. Not the other book mentioned by the other two guys Queer and Win or whatever it was. I am smart enough to know the Church didn't condone a book written by a homosexual. < smile - that was fun!>
I put a link with my source but I know if you visit it you will melt. :-)
Gosh it is nice to have a little funnin' on these threads.
2/3's haven't been published or haven't been "revealed"??
For an X-er you know little about this faith?
The Book of Mormon had all we need to be baptized the correct ordinance that was the whole mission of Moroni to prepare the way for those special documents to be restored upon the earth!
4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are:
first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ;
second, Repentance;
third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins;
fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Rev. 14
6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Are promise to come forth in the Lord time!
Some speculation it will come from the polynesian...
Who knows??
At least, I'm the real deal. I'm no egg substitute.
But I think you're onto something. If I were you, I'd approach the Egg substitute product industry with a marvelous marketing method. You could say to them:
"See, all we have to do is for us to proclaim that we have the True 'Restored' egg."
We'll call it "Hatched-Again" theology, all hatched up & patched together according to the gold plates I found in my backyard garden.
Then, for added punch, we would call all of the true confessors and professors within the "real" egg industry "cracked, corrupt eggs." And to top it all off, we would only have to say that all of the policies and procedures adopted by the egg industry was an "abomination" to the sources of those eggs.
What d'yya say?
Why the Polynesians? Did Jesus visit Polynesia also?
Did Jesus visit Polynesia also?
not that I know of
***
It could be another Book of Mormon family that also have records who move elsewhere "Spectulation!"
But then again, it could just be Bali Hu
Those political clergy of Constantine debated and decided the nature of the Godhead Nicene Creed, which scripture were less offensive to the function world government were NOT part of Lord annoited Priesthood!
The scriptures (though not yet collected into one volume) were already determined at this point, ... the church had been using them for centuries.
There are various accounts of what happen how manuscripts are selected for it was done by non priesthood holders!
So we have no clue what was excluded
Accept heresay!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.