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
Jesus Christ as the Creator of this earth and all things. Jesus Christ is the God of this earth. God the father is our father and creator (spiritually) and is Christ’s father, so he is also a God. The Spirit of God has moved many in the scriptures, and in modern times.
So God the father can be called God, Jesus Christ can be called God, and the Holy Ghost can be called God. They are all members of the Godhead, but I think you knew that already.
So adding “The son of” to clarify what was already there is a change to you? Adding punctuation? Changing a word that meant pure, but now has racist tones is also unacceptable? So I suppose adding verses to the Bible invalidates it for you too. How about punctuation? What of differing translations? We are undrestandably curious about your beliefs too.
I did not attack you ad homonym, or other wise, I merely objected to the equating of Mormons and terrorists, I feel any one in good touch with reality will agree with my objection.
BTW, I hope you and yours are doing well.
BTW I am travelling, and will have spotty access, so slow replies should be expected.
That's funny. Nobody else has ever labeled me as a "bitter, twisted individual" operating "with a grudge against Mormons."
Better find out who's posting under your name.
BTW, assessing "bitter" temperaments and evaluating folks who are operating in "grudge" mode is usually conducted best in "up-close" mode in which you actually know the individual and can weigh a good chunk of the fruit produced by that person.
I find out very spiritually dangerous to start judging folks' inward motivations (even when I know a person better).
It's a bit harder to do from a distance and not recommended for those doing "drive-by" postings--postings that are then picked up as personal-attack ammunition to be wielded by online allies.
Well if you are praying just before you are about to be sent to your death
Just who is Jesus praying to?
a. himself
b. His Father in Heaven
Mark 14: 36
36 And he said, Abba, Father,
all things are possible unto thee;
take away this cup from me:
nevertheless not what I will,
but what thou wilt.
____________________________________________________________
3 Ne. 11:
11 And behold,
I am the light and the life of the world;
and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me,
and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world,
in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning.
b Matt. 26: 39 (36-46).
39 And he went a little further,
and fell on his face,
and prayed, saying,
O my Father,
if it be possible,
let this cup pass from me:
nevertheless not as I will,
but as thou wilt.
D&C 19: 17 (13-20).
17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;
http://scriptures.lds.org/mark/14/36a
excuse me you just impugn me in the same breath!
even though that is what you asked us Christians to do.
I have never asked Christians NO such things I have many Christian friends here and we get along just find!
What I have asked is those who repeat the same talking points each time they see the word Mormon/LDS?
You been here since 2004 I been here since 2000 and it is the same people, same questions truly very few of my thoughts are exclusively about you!
To say I post devotionals only to avoid rebuttal the very post you are on is not devotional CC it is open there is a differents I hope you recognized that in the future.
Have to go pick up the kids now. You have a good day.
>>Christ IS our Contemporary, Living Prophet and Living Revelation!
>>While He may choose to send forth mouthpieces on His behalf, they are
>>like undershepherds of the Chief Shepherd. We have no lack of a Living Prophet.
>>No mere mortal usurps His place on the Prophetic Throne. He is still Prophet,
>>High Priest and King as the prophets of old foretold!
So when is the last time you heard of anyone who spoke to god "face to face" as is recorded in the bible?
Two examples:
Gen 32:30 http://scriptures.lds.org/gen/32/30#30
Ex. 33:11 http://scriptures.lds.org/ex/33/11#11
I got more, but these two will suffice to make my point, god has always had the ability to talk to man "Face to Face.
Why (if he does not change) would he not do so now?
"Undershepards" Well, not exactly the way I would say it, but yes, Prophets work under and with Christ, having been appointed, and set apart by his authority. They are then to reveal his word as directed by him. Not all are worthy to receive revelation directly from God, and many would not survive the attempt. (I am one who does not feel worthy for the communication I do have, so I know what I am talking about here) So Jesus Christ uses righteous men to go where he would have no choice but to destroy (by his very presence) those he wants to communicate with.
This is a perfect system, as it helps both the messenger to grow in service and the message is delivered, as intended.
So lets ask this a different way, why (logically) would God stop using prophets?
The problem: archaeological evidence on the ground (again, please pardon the phrase) does not support the notion that any advanced culture (advanced architecture, etc.) ever extended as far north as the hill now known as Cumorah in New York in Precolumbian times.
Even wars, storms, and earthquakes as cataclysmic as that described by the Book of Mormon would've left some spectacular ruins near Cumorah, and they would've been found by now.
So where are they?
So, you're basically telling us that if Frosty the Snowman started to simultaneously melt into dripping water & give off vapors of steam that there is absolutely no distinctiveness between those vapors & Frosty, or no distinctiveness between the dripping water & frosty? Wherever that dripping water goes, there goes Frosty downstream. And whatever cloud that vapor goes into, there goes Frosty...storming down upon us later on.
The analogy is simple, but yet doesn't even begin to reflect the profound complexity of a God who communicates with Himself: Snow is water; vapor is water; water is water. All one nature; yet revealed in distinctly presentable forms.
Basically, what you're telling us is that you believe in an ultimate God (prior to any other gods and any angels & any men) who was utterly alone. Love always has a subject and an object. If God is Love, He has always been loving. If the Original, Ultimate God from eternity had no on-par part of Himself to love, then there was a time in which He wasn't Love. That, is an impossibility.
God is Love. He has always been relational. If a man and wife can be 2-in-1, and if that reflects who God is, then why can't God be 3-in-1? Why do you believe in a God who is less unified with His fellow divine personalities than a man and wife is in marriage?
Finally, LDS can't even conclude who they should pray to based upon their own sacred Scriptures. LDS say they pray to Father alone; yet the Book of Mormon is replete w/numerous references to Nephite disciples who were praying directly to Jesus. [You can't go back into those verses and add into the margin that they were praying to Father through Jesus. Those Book of Mormon verses clearly do not say any such thing].
>> I was one once, remember.
Interesting, I don’t believe you mentioned that to me in our prior discussions, but it does explain a lot.
>>You are posting these "devotionals" as a protected way to "get your message out" without allowing for rebuttal.
So no one should be able to say anything positive about their religion without rebuttal? Got it.
>>For those of us who believe you are portraying an inaccurate picture, and possibly causing Christians to fall away,
>>it is our responsibility to confront these claims of the LDS head on.
And why don’t we just have a one time thread, get it all out in the open, vent your spleen so to speak, and then you can just post to these threads with a link?
>>As long as you keep posting your point of view, I will keep rebutting it.
Consistency, it’s a good thing, usually.
>>I believe it is something God has called me to do....just as LDS believe they need to proselyte to, and convert all of us.
We were told by a prophet (even if you just believe he is a man) to prosolyte. Who asked you to do this? Is there a possibility you are mistaken? How do you know its *your* job to protect the world from Mormons, we are not so bad, you aren’t a bad person, and you used to be one of us.
Maybe he was like Edgar Cayce?
You can rebutt my devotional,
but I would never think of rebuttal
to the Daily Reflection
Daily Mass even the
Calvinist devotional etc.
Should I read things there that are contrary to my thougths it would be disrespectful to another voice! Also I feel it is best I mind my own business!
It you would check the thread count you would see ourside of those on the ping list, the viewership does not attract non members yet it does get hits from anti but not from regular Christians.
BTW you are doing us a favor CC by draging us to an open forum we get more viewers that you never hear from but we do in freepmail so thank you!:)
An I know that my Heavely Father would be disapointed in my actions!
There are some similarities between Joseph Smith and Edgar Cayce. Cayce, too, was uneducated, etc. And Cayce produced voluminous amounts of transcription. Many odd predictions, amalgams of stories, etc. Smith's prodigy isn't unheard of.
http://skepdic.com/cayce.html
An I know that my Heavely Father would be disapointed in my actions!
I'm sure you meant "would not be disappointed." And I'm sure you're right. Your Heavenly Father loves you.
I can't help but love you even thought you can be a heart breaker!
(1) Jesus said, "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father" (John 14:9). You don't need to go back to the OT for face-to-face encounters. Go also to the Book of Acts, where the resurrected Jesus appeared to Paul.
(2) Has Jesus appeared to others since then? I have no doubt He has. But you won't find it in a document like the D&C that reduces the "New Testament" into a "No Testament." The problem w/the D&C is that it's not noble. The Bereans were noble. They filtered the New Revelation by searching the old revelation to "see if what was said was true" (Acts 17:11). LDS turn that on its head, putting the old revelation through the grid of the new revelation. And they do that by adding the "veto phrase" - "insofar as correctly translated" -- and then using that as a trump card whenever it contradicts the newer revelation. Therefore, the Bible is relegated to secondary status.
(3) The problem w/the theology of a Resident King Prophet on earth that bumps Jesus out of the way is that the authority eminating from Commissioner Jesus is a more "on-the-go" thrust. In other words, since Jesus is now operating on a New Testament Covenant of a world-wide kingdom and is no longer strategically operating through a distinct people group like the Jews alone, "sent-ones" (apostles) are vital. LDS try to model an Old Testament focus where there is a stationary "House of the Lord" (temples) instead of realizing that people themselves are the temples of the Holy Spirit. [Note also the heavy "Zion" theme where the big base is Utah). LDS try to model an OT focus where there is a stationary "go-to" prophet instead of "on-the-go" apostles and disciples (Mt 28) who are led by the "Sent-One" Holy Spirit (John 16).
(4) LDS underplay the equivalency of the daily "face to face" interaction between the Holy Spirit and those He resides in. I'm sorry, but you can't get any more intimate than a Holy Spirit who is in no way confined to so-called living prophets, but resides in everyone who is in Christ!
(5) As for your alleged "face to face" prophets, how many revelations have been added to the D&C these past 110 years by your living prophets? Has it neared double-figures yet? If the LDS god is the equivalent of a living, active, dynamic volcano, why no evident lava flow equivalency of Scripture coming out of the depth? Why has the mountain been so silent? Name 3 to 4 vital revelations off the top of your head given by God through your living prophet?
I think one should be able to say any positive or negative thing they want. On Sunday, I tried to ask Restornu what she meant when she said something about "things that were removed from the New Testament." I wouldn't say that was exactly a positive thing to say....in fact I would say it is a direct attack on my religious beliefs.
I would hope you could recognize my desire to rebut her point....also her thread contained reference to Christ being "appointed" Savior. At that point P-Marlowe tried to question her about the "appointment." Mod told us questions are not allowed on a devotional thread.
Hence I posted her article so that we Christians could point out what we saw as errors in the suppositions of the thread.
Interesting, I don’t believe you mentioned that to me in our prior discussions, but it does explain a lot.
I've never tried to hide it. In fact I've been very vocal about it on FR. You aren't passing judgement on me, now are you? ;-)
Would you like me to continue pinging you when I mention you in a post?
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.