Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

145 Excellent

About Gervin

  • Rank
    Separates Water & Dry Land

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,681 profile views
  1. I think some Early Modern English might have slipped into the country without your knowledge. "In 1751, the London Company of Comedians , under the direction of Lewis Hallam, landed in Virginia where the ban on the immigration of actors had recently been lifted. Their first production was The Merchant of Venice , which played to mixed groups of settlers and Native Americans, and over the next ten years they added Richard III, King Lear, Romeo and Juliet, Othello and Hamlet to their repertory . By 1754, the company had toured prosperous cities like Fredericksburg, Williamsburg, and Annapolis. They spent four years in Jamaica and returned to Philadelphia and New York in 1758 with new productions of Cymbeline, The Taming of the Shrew, and Macbeth . Despite the continuing animosity towards anything British, citizens of the new nation continued to love Shakespeare who was now equally fashionable on both sides of the Atlantic. In the 19th century travelling companies spread the plays into every corner of the United States. The American public now had the opportunity to see most of the plays. Shakespeare served as a unifying force throughout the century: his works were one of the few things that were constant while the country and its people were expanding. No other writer was so quickly assimilated into the wilderness, perhaps because his works could be presented in the easily accessible form of drama. The blood and violence, passion and basic comedy must have had a strong appeal to frontiersmen. As early as 1810 there were theater companies established from Montreal to the Gulf of Mexico; from the mouth of the St. Lawrence to the western tip of the Great Lakes; from the northern Ohio territory down the Ohio River, through Kentucky and St. Louis. These companies produced their own plays, as well as welcomed-primarily British-touring stars. Charles Kean began his tour in 1831 in New York and eventually returned 15 years later through the Mississippi Valley. https://www.nosweatshakespeare.com/resources/shakespeare-and-america/
  2. I think the hard question (to answer) was my first - "why no inscriptions, symbology, or edificial evidence of a Jewish-believing people?" Saying their language was "local," doesn't really tell us much. "Local" languages in MesoAmerica are fairly well documented (not sure if you saw - Proto-Mayan language ) Do you put the Book of Mormon people into one of these languages? (on top of the Hebrew and Egyptian that were retained)
  3. "Some of the religious?" The Torah was read weekly. If not written in Hebrew, then what? If not heard in Hebrew, then what? If the Book of Mormon peoples spoke a Proto-Mayan language then they would have been familiar with the writings and symbology of same. They could have written the Book of Mormon on stone using glyphs and not had to worry about a lack of space, or hefting the writings to some other part of the world to bury. They could have been buried in situ, so that about 19th centuries later any reputable Mayan scholar could do all the translation.
  4. Well, none have been found and there is no consensus as to where to begin a search. The criteria for a location is that it must support a people who, for 1,000 years, maintained a spoken and written language of Afroasiatic origins. That maintenance plan would also include those Hebrew elements associated with the Temple. Where do you suggest looking?
  5. I'm curious as to why the people of the Book of Mormon - unlike any religious culture I'm aware of - left no record of symbols or symbology. Yet, Egyptian is written symbolically, as are elements of Hebrew. If the Book of Mormon peoples were in Mesoamerica, then there was plenty of rock on which to inscribe something ... anything. Even a crude menorah - http://holylandphotos.org/browse.asp?s=1,3,7,23,133&img=TWCSPN03
  6. I think he learned many things. What was the most impressive object he found?
  7. I'm not familiar with his testimony or the testimony of Harris, if any. I didn't express any doubt over what they claim occurred. I just asked 1) where the information came from (if it can be sourced), and 2) if people generally believe if the text was proofed by God in real time. If God ensured that the words that appeared were correctly copied down, then there is no way that Joseph Smith added his own words, vocabulary or idioms. And he didn't add the words of the KJV (the original author /editor somehow wrote in the KJV idiom), and he didn't add phrases found in other writings and Biblical-like texts of the day. That's why I asked if people really believe that to be true. Honest response. thx
  8. Martin Harris: Quote Here are two independent (?) testimonies to a God-directed quality control of the text that, if true, could only have originated with Jos. Smith. Anyone know who imparted this information to Harris and Whitmer? Are they to be believed?
  9. They learn the secret of the brass ball back in Chapter 16. Are you saying they knew how the ball worked and they nevertheless "wandered" for 8 years? I mean, really - if they were so unfaithful then why were they chosen to build a ship, navigate a ship, land a ship, settle a new world, etc.. - stuff they could only do by faith? And they were not afflicted with hunger and thirst: 3 And thus we see that the commandments of God must be fulfilled. And if it so be that the children of men keep the commandments of God he doth nourish them, and strengthen them, and provide means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he has commanded them; wherefore, he did provide means for us while we did sojourn in the wilderness. I'm still curious as to how long you think it took for them to travel from Nahom to Bountiful.
  10. If the Book of Mormon came forth via conspiratorial means, what is the minimum number of people who had to be involved?
  11. Anyone consciously involved in a conspiracy could be deemed as lacking integrity. But, in contrast to your claim, there is no evidence that every single person involved in a conspiracy will "inevitably" rat each other out. I don't think we define hard evidence in the same way, so I'll leave you to make your case among fellow believers. Based on what I read on this board, the adherents have plenty of doubts and a lack of consensus as to what they consider evidence.
  12. Perhaps, but would exposure of the Book of Mormon as fraudulent be considered "criminal?" Criminal conspiracies typically involve personal gain or direct malice. The motivations are high, but also the motivations of law enforcement to encourage ratting out the group. Social conspiracies are more vague - think about the industry-wide conspiracy to keep minorities out of established white neighborhoods or apartment buildings. While the laws caught up some offenders, the motivations were more nuanced. Religious conspiracies, as a subset of social conspiracies, contain motivations limited only by imagination: https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/culture/explainer/worlds-most-obscure-religions I believe that the coming forth of the Book of Mormon was conspiratorial and the motives of those involved limited only by their imaginations, as stirred on by a myriad of cultural, religious, and personal factors, interests, and motivations. It's become something quaint. How could that be a crime?
  13. It's no problem for an author writing in 1540 to create over 50,000 phrases that later appear in KJV, ca 1611? How so?
  14. Why exclude the KJV? It presents the overwhelming evidence for EModE outside of the the realm of Joseph Smith's knowledge; more than fifty thousand phrases of three or more words, excluding definite and indefinite articles, are common to the Bible and the Book of Mormon.
  • Create New...