Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Calm

Tad Callister: A Case for the Book of Mormon

Recommended Posts

On 8/28/2019 at 10:16 AM, carbon dioxide said:

"George Stuart, a leading Maya scholar who worked for National Geographic for almost 40 years, did an interview in 2011 on National Geographic Live.  In the course of his interview, he made the following revealing comment:  “And we hardly know anything, really about the Maya [believed to have existed during a portion of Book of Mormon times].  You know, there’s almost 6000 archaeological sites and we’ve dug at forty of them.”[9]  That is less than 1%. "

He needs to update a bit. Its far worse than that with the LIDAR technology. 

"The LiDAR mapping detected more than 60,000 previously unknown structures in total, from unknown pyramids, palace structures, terraced fields, roadways, defensive walls and towers, and houses. Archaeologists are realizing that the ancient population centers they’ve spent decades studying are much bigger than they speculated. "  http://www.ancientpages.com/2018/02/03/lidar-technology-reveals-secrets-of-ancient-maya-civilization/

It says " The survey of encompassed Several major Maya sites, including the largest at Tikal, and El Zotz have been surveyed and these sites cover the area of 2,100-square kilometers."  That really is a small portion of central America.  I wonder what would be found if they scanned the entire central America area what they would find.

The article also cited many instances of finding what they thought were animal pens, as I recall.  An important point in view of the Nephites/Lamanites dealing with a lot of flocks and herds.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Elephants in the Book of Mormon are said to have been useful to the Jaredites. It's an important distinction.

I highly doubt that the mammoths of Wrangel Island were held in captivity and used for agriculture, war or transportation. There's nothing that would support the claim that wild mammoths were useful to Mesoamericans in any way at all. First of all, you are talking about two completely different climates. A woolly mammoth from an island in the Arctic Sea isn't going to be very useful to an Olmec in tropical Mexico. Its like saying that because saber tooth tiger bones were found in California, the Inuits of Greenland might have domesticated cats. And even if the Jaredites were able to tame these strange (and dangerous) beasts within the first few centuries of their arrival in a new climate, it would be unlikely that they would have killed off a useful beast of burden within a few hundred years.

Taming of wild elephants is a very very difficult thing and there's only one region that had the capacity for domestic elephant handling in 2500 BC. Even today, only elephas maximus is gentle enough. The mention in the Book of Mormon of elephants being useful to a Bronze Age civilization sets the narrative to a very specific part of the world. If you're looking for a historical Book of Mormon, the mention of domestic elephants constrains us to India and Southeast Asia. There's simply no way around this.

You're making two assumptions here that may not be correct:  1) that the Jaredites used elephants, cureloms and cumoms as tamed beasts of some sort; 2) the 'elephants' they used were of the mammoth species.  Perhaps the Jaredite use of these animals was simply as hunted food.  Perhaps they were a different, yet unknown species of elephant.

I recall seeing a TV documentary on Asian elephants a number of years ago, and one of the species they covered looked a lot like a mammoth.  It had some hair and a slight hump, and I would guess it would have a lot of mammoth DNA present.  Also, VIctor Von Hagen has a footnote in his book, Ancient Sun Kingdoms of the Americas, to the effect that elephant bones had been found in the Valley of Mexico, dating to around 2,000 years BC.  Data very often gets lost, overlooked, supressed.  I've always wanted to look into this further, but have not done so yet.

Still your point is well taken.  However, with the persistence of elephants in Se Asia over the millenia, why would you find mention of them only in the more ancient Book of Ether?

Edited by blarsen

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, blarsen said:

For me, and I would say for most people, what I regard as miracles or very unusual coincidences, is precisely because they aren’t everyday events.  So you lost me on this one.

Again, for me, and I think most people, I would discount a book that made such persistent claims to be true and real history, and yet was not.  Doesn’t matter what gems I might find inside the book.  I would be inclined to discount even these.

Its like, I don’t much care for telemarketing, but especially can’t stand telemarketers who spoof phones numbers as being their own numbers when they aren’t.  Why?  Because they are approaching me right off the bat with a lie.  Doesn’t matter how good the product may be they want to sell me.

Dostoevsky was one of my favorite authors, but he never presumed to put over on his readers that they were reading genuine biography.

Historicity is very important because it underscores the truth of what is written in the book.  Also, establishing a reasonable case for the historicity of the book will go a long way towards encouraging people who would never give it even a side glance, a reason for taking it seriously.

My point was that one man's unusual event maybe another man's completely normal and usual event

Well I see the history issue as far more complicated.

Many philosophers today believe that truth is undefinable. We know how to use the term we can use it correctly but we can't really do find it. Historical truth is particularly subject to these objections I think. History becomes "His-story " as opposed to, say, my story.

And then we still also have the problem that historical truth is not spiritual truth. Jesus could have died exactly as described as still have not been the savior.

The events of the Book of Mormon could be actually totally factually true that still have no spiritual value because God did not authorize any of it.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-deflationary/

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/30/2019 at 11:09 PM, Rajah Manchou said:

There are dozens if not hundreds of extant inscribed brass/copper plates in the region. The accounts of the Cochin brass plates are unique in that they describe the script on the plates and other texts circulating among the Jews as Palmyra Hebrew and some of these texts have been verified as Biblical pseudepigrapha dating to the Book of Mormon time period.

There's ongoing controversy around the provenance and fate of Buchanan's 1806 brass plates.

Umm that link to wikipedia dates it to the 19th century and the origin text to maybe the 2cd century. The controversy is interesting and it sounds like the plates are much smaller than the 19th cenutry text tends to portray them. (Or maybe I'm just misreading it)

On 8/30/2019 at 11:09 PM, Rajah Manchou said:

With the publication of The Star in the East, there was uncertainty about the provenance and dating of the brass and copper plates of the Cochin Jews. Anyone reading Buchanan's account in 1809 could have easily drawn the conclusion that the brass plates were inscribed in Palmyrene Hebrew and carried across the sea by Israelites around 600 BC. 

OK. That's fine. I thought you were making a claim about their actual age. Although to me the text seems pretty clear as to the dating.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

No more ability to edit, so I'll quote myself. 

I sent this to FairMormon. If any of you know, has this already been addressed on there?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

No more ability to edit, so I'll quote myself. 

I sent this to FairMormon. If any of you know, has this already been addressed on there?

This sort of thing (that is, attempts to explain the Book of Mormon as little more than plagiarism from the Bible) has been discussed at length and in detail many times.   John Tvedtnes, Matt Roper, and Ben McGuire have all put together notable responses at various times.   One of the things they did well in responding to the Tanners was to show how often critics looking for New Testament parallels to Book of Mormon passages neglect the Old Testament and Pseudepigraphal and DDS precedents for the New Testament.   At the old Maxwell site, it would be easy to link to them.  They dealt with similar charges from the Tanner's and others.  

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr/vol8/iss2/14/

Ben McGuire has shown how the parallel hunting is often severally flawed. 

http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2017/02/ben-mcguire-refutes-alleged.html

I've dabbled myself several times.  For instance, my essay on NDE accounts and the Book of Mormon shows that there is far more to Alma's conversion than cribbing from Paul.  The linked essay begins with a summary from Kirster Stendahl's essay in Truman Madsen's volume of essays from the 70s, Reflections on Mormonism: Judeo-Christian Parallels.  I've got the book at home, have read Stendahl, and also Richard L. Anderson's response, "Imitation Gospels and Christ's Book of Mormon Ministry."  

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/apocryphal-writings-and-latter-day-saints/4-imitation-gospels-and-christ-s-book-mormon

And there are John W. Welch's increasingly impressive explorations of 3 Nephi compared to Matthew.  Welch's book on Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount has an entire chapter on just how much of the Sermon on the Mount is like older Jewish material.

https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/illuminating-sermon-temple-sermon-mount

This stuff is not mentioned in the linked tract.  It is permissible to ask "Why not?" So one notable thing about the linked document is that it has no interest whatsoever in balancing the scales, to understand or explore the Book of Mormon, but rather, is an attempt to overawe the naive.  I've read a lot, so, I am not overawed.  Just away from my books, and missing the old Maxwell Institute website.

And even if Joseph was just cribbing from the New Testament (and it was obviously and unavoidably part of his environment, part of what the Lord refers to his language and understanding), a tract like this does not even mention the existence of things like Mormon's Codex, or In the Footsteps of Lehi, or Glimpse's of Lehi's Jerusalem.   Keeping perspective is the key thing.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited by Kevin Christensen
adding links
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

This sort of thing (that is, attempts to explain the Book of Mormon as little more than plagiarism from the Bible) has been discussed at length and in detail many times.   John Tvedtnes, Matt Roper, and Ben McGuire have all put together notable responses at various times.   One of the things they did well in responding to the Tanners was to show how often critics looking for New Testament parallels to Book of Mormon passages neglect the Old Testament and Pseudepigraphal and DDS precedents for the New Testament.   At the old Maxwell site, it would be easy to link to them.  They dealt with similar charges from the Tanner's and others.  

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr/vol8/iss2/14/

Ben McGuire has shown how the parallel hunting is often severally flawed. 

http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2017/02/ben-mcguire-refutes-alleged.html

I've dabbled myself several times.  For instance, my essay on NDE accounts and the Book of Mormon shows that there is far more to Alma's conversion than cribbing from Paul.  The linked essay begins with a summary from Kirster Stendahl's essay in Truman Madsen's volume of essays from the 70s, Reflections on Mormonism: Judeo-Christian Parallels.  I've got the book at home, have read Stendahl, and also Richard L. Anderson's response, "Imitation Gospels and Christ's Book of Mormon Ministry."  

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/apocryphal-writings-and-latter-day-saints/4-imitation-gospels-and-christ-s-book-mormon

And there are John W. Welch's increasingly impressive explorations of 3 Nephi compared to Matthew.  Welch's book on Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount has an entire chapter on just how much of the Sermon on the Mount is like older Jewish material.

https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/illuminating-sermon-temple-sermon-mount

This stuff is not mentioned in the linked tract.  It is permissible to ask "Why not?" So one notable thing about the linked document is that it has no interest whatsoever in balancing the scales, to understand or explore the Book of Mormon, but rather, is an attempt to overawe the naive.  I've read a lot, so, I am not overawed.  Just away from my books, and missing the old Maxwell Institute website.

And even if Joseph was just cribbing from the New Testament (and it was obviously and unavoidably part of his environment, part of what the Lord refers to his language and understanding), a tract like this does not even mention the existence of things like Mormon's Codex, or In the Footsteps of Lehi, or Glimpse's of Lehi's Jerusalem.   Keeping perspective is the key thing.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Thanks Kevin. I did get a response from FairMormon a few minutes ago. And like I knew it would be, it was very long. I wish more could use common sense because it's very blatent, is it not? That these verses are exact replicas of many of scriputures? I'd never seen this link before, so it startled me, because I'd heard of the many that were copied from Isaiah but this is all over the Bible. Making Joseph Smith a very well researched author, IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

even if Joseph was just cribbing from the New Testament

It wasn't Joseph Smith cribbing from the NT, since the words were given to him. The extensive OT and NT quoting in the Book of Mormon was an integral part of the English-language translation that God dictated to him ("as dictated by God", from Matthew Davis's notes on Joseph Smith's words in February 1840).

One of the misleading things LDS scholarship persists in doing, against the evidence, is calling, for example, the lengthy word for word quoting of Mark in Mormon "allusion" rather than calling it what it clearly is, biblical quoting. This is another inaccurate move, and the approach will eventually be abandoned.  We can see it, for example, in Wayment's NT notes (2019). The justification for this mislabeling is that otherwise the general church reader will be confused. But presenting the reality and characterizing it accurately is a better move: The truth shall set you free.

In fact, the biblical quoting and blending in the Book of Mormon is so extensive — at times complex and at times intricate — that it is highly unlikely Joseph could have or would have done it the way it is.

Instead of being shook up by documents such as the above, look for the newest critical text publication, to come out in late November, The King James Quotations in the Book of Mormon, authored by Royal Skousen, with my collaboration, wherein 36 quotation blocks, with a minimum matching level of n > 15, are clearly set forth side by side with King James readings, in comparative fashion, and wherein shorter biblical quotations / blendings at the level of n > 6 are set forth as well, in comparative fashion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/20/2019 at 3:23 PM, Tacenda said:

Thanks Kevin. I did get a response from FairMormon a few minutes ago. And like I knew it would be, it was very long. I wish more could use common sense because it's very blatent, is it not? That these verses are exact replicas of many of scriputures? I'd never seen this link before, so it startled me, because I'd heard of the many that were copied from Isaiah but this is all over the Bible. Making Joseph Smith a very well researched author, IMO. 

You are welcome.  The question about Bible language in the Book of Mormon is certainly legitimate, but perspective is key. 

Don't assume everything in the New Testament is original and completely unlike and/or not dependent on any older material.

Don't assume when Joseph Smith translates the Book of Mormon according to his language and learning that the New and Old Testaments should not have any influence in an authentic translation.

Don't assume that if Joseph Smith uses New or Old Testament language in his translations that there must be something wrong with that.  It is a translation from the written language of the plates to the that of the translator, and the point of a translation is to communicate, to make something understandable in a different language.  If someone says, "He's a chip of the old block," and someone else says, "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree", both could also be explained as as saying, "The boy is like his father."  Translation across language, culture, and thought is about communicating with what works, not about being completely unlike anything anyone ever said.  Trying to keep too much fidelity to the original language just might prevent any communication, which would defeat the purpose of translation.  A translated phrase does not have to be completely original to work as a translation.

Remember that parallels are very common in literature.  That is why Joseph Campbell can write a famous book called Hero with a Thousand Faces.  Humans are born, raised, eat, drink, learn, war, court, marry, parent, migrate, play, fight, die, etc.  Parallels are very common because people are people and do people things. Even in the way people think generates parallels.   Nibley's essays on the Sophic and Mantic in The Ancient State show an amazing set of corresponding thoughts across time, space, and culture. 

Ben offers some simple guidelines in considering narratives and the two column format:

Quote

How do we avoid making these mistakes? I engage a set of four similar rules:

  • Differences are as important as similarities.
  • Parallels need to be examined in progressively expanding contexts.
  • Parallels should be discussed in a detailed and specific fashion.
  • Rhetorical values, the intentions of an author, and the purposes of a text should all to be taken into consideration.

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/finding-parallels-some-cautions-and-criticisms-part-two/

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

Edited by Kevin Christensen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I wish more could use common sense because it's very blatent, is it not?

Meaning what exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/31/2019 at 4:58 PM, blarsen said:

The article also cited many instances of finding what they thought were animal pens, as I recall.  An important point in view of the Nephites/Lamanites dealing with a lot of flocks and herds.

It’s interesting becuase on a lot of more anti-subreddits (which can be entertaining sometimes) they always cite archeology as their killing stroke. Numerous “Small bracelet found in Siberia of ancient tribe..but still no evidence for Nephites” posts adorn their threads.

It concerned me for awhile until I did a little research and discovered how little we actually know about almost any of the major tribes and peoples that lived here anciently. For all we know we could dig up even 5 more Mayan cites and discover that what we knew was almost entirely wrong, who knows. It seriously (and this isn’t an apologist speaking) could change tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SettingDogStar said:

It’s interesting becuase on a lot of more anti-subreddits (which can be entertaining sometimes) they always cite archeology as their killing stroke. Numerous “Small bracelet found in Siberia of ancient tribe..but still no evidence for Nephites” posts adorn their threads.

It concerned me for awhile until I did a little research and discovered how little we actually know about almost any of the major tribes and peoples that lived here anciently. For all we know we could dig up even 5 more Mayan cites and discover that what we knew was almost entirely wrong, who knows. It seriously (and this isn’t an apologist speaking) could change tomorrow.

OR as some suggest, discover that both Nephite and Lamanite culture existed as cultural differences within a more dominant Mayan culture, perhaps much like the evil Republicans and perfect Democrats co-exist in the USA.  The analogy would be better if we had civil war skirmishes happening now, but heck we know who has all the guns.  So it still doesn't totally work :diablo:

Same old story- the good guys vs the bad guys.  Of course you can switch which is which mentally if you wish

Wow.  Never realized my talent for rapping before

You can switch

Which is which

Mentally if you wish

:)

 

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Calm said:

Meaning what exactly?

Sorry so late in responding, ran out of my allotment of posts, dang it! I mean't it's obvious that Bible scriptures have been integrated in the BoM.

Edited by Tacenda

Share this post


Link to post

Given Kevin's post, is there any real reason to see that as an issue for you?

PS:  I don't mind waiting, I know you are on limited.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post

Came upon something new, wondering if it's been discussed.

The name Nephi in the Bible. And the comparable scripture alongside the BoM. 

2 Maccabees 1:36 - And Neemias called this thing Naphthar, which is as much as to say, a cleansing: but many men call it Nephi.

2 Nephi 5:8 -And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi; wherefore, we did call it Nephi.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Came upon something new, wondering if it's been discussed.

The name Nephi in the Bible. And the comparable scripture alongside the BoM. 

2 Maccabees 1:36 - And Neemias called this thing Naphthar, which is as much as to say, a cleansing: but many men call it Nephi.

2 Nephi 5:8 -And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi; wherefore, we did call it Nephi.

Yes.  Tvedtnes and others have discussed this before.   Matthew Bowen's recent research shows that in this case, as in many others, there is more much happening in the text with that name than just the appearance of a random name.  It is not only authentic to time and place, but the word play shows that the authors knew what it meant.

https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2019/laman-and-nephi-as-key-words

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Is this a case against the BofM? http://www.ldsdefector.com/fact-1838/?fbclid=IwAR2YeJFRCCV55qdRUJtLoodnDdBfr2i3hlJDAIqiNZfrjP-ThQiUdmI6ZN8

 SPALDING WITNESS

“I left the state of New York, late in the year 1810, and arrived at this place, about the 1st of Jan[uary]. following. Soon after my arrival, I formed a co-partnership with Solomon Spalding, for the purpose of re-building a forge which he had commenced a year or two before. He very frequently read to me from a manuscript which he was writing, which he entitled the ‘Manuscript Found,’ and which he represented as being found in this town. I spent many hours in hearing him read said writings, and became well acquainted with its contents. He wished me to assist him in getting his production printed, alleging that a book of that kind would meet with a rapid sale. I designed doing so, but the forge not meeting our anticipations, we failed in business, when I declined having any thing to do with the publication of the book. This book represented the American Indians as the descendants of the lost tribes, gave an account of their leaving Jerusalem, their contentions and wars, which were many and great. One time, when he was reading to me the tragic account of Laban, I pointed out to him what I considered an inconsistency, which he promised to correct; but by referring to the Book of Mormon, I find to my surprise that it stands there just as he read it to me then.- Some months ago I borrowed the Golden Bible, put it into my pocket, carried it home, and thought no more of it.- About a week after, my wife found the book in my coat pocket, as it hung up, and commenced reading it aloud as I lay upon the bed. She had not read 20 minutes till I was astonished to find the same passages in it that Spalding had read to me more, than twenty years before, from his ‘Manuscript Found.’ Since that, I have more fully examined the said Golden Bible, and have no hesitation in saying that the historical part of it is principally, if not wholly taken from the ‘Manuscript Found.’ I well recollect telling Mr. Spalding, that the so frequent use of the words ‘And it came to pass,’ ‘Now it came to pass,’ rendered it ridiculous. Spalding left here in 1812, and I furnished him the means to carry him to Pittsburgh, where he said he would get the book printed, and pay me. But I never heard any more from him or his writings, till I saw them in the Book of Mormon.”

~Henry Lake, Conneaut, Ashtabula Co. O. September, 1833 – E.D. Howe’s, Mormonism Unvailed, pages 281-282 ~

1838.png

Share this post


Link to post

The text "Manuscript Found" can be compared now it has been found.

https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/rsc/id/13807

People can decide for themselves how well it compares with the BoM.

Btw, got that link through the Church website:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/spaulding-manuscript?lang=eng

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Is this a case against the BofM?

This comment isn't serious, is it?  Just some recycled stupidity.  For a recent discussion, see this.

Share this post


Link to post

 

On 8/28/2019 at 9:16 AM, carbon dioxide said:

"George Stuart, a leading Maya scholar who worked for National Geographic for almost 40 years, did an interview in 2011 on National Geographic Live.  In the course of his interview, he made the following revealing comment:  “And we hardly know anything, really about the Maya [believed to have existed during a portion of Book of Mormon times].  You know, there’s almost 6000 archaeological sites and we’ve dug at forty of them.”[9]  That is less than 1%. "

He needs to update a bit. Its far worse than that with the LIDAR technology. 

"The LiDAR mapping detected more than 60,000 previously unknown structures in total, from unknown pyramids, palace structures, terraced fields, roadways, defensive walls and towers, and houses. Archaeologists are realizing that the ancient population centers they’ve spent decades studying are much bigger than they speculated. "  http://www.ancientpages.com/2018/02/03/lidar-technology-reveals-secrets-of-ancient-maya-civilization/

It says " The survey of encompassed Several major Maya sites, including the largest at Tikal, and El Zotz have been surveyed and these sites cover the area of 2,100-square kilometers."  That really is a small portion of central America.  I wonder what would be found if they scanned the entire central America area what they would find.

This just is not remotely evidence.  I'm surprised that so many people think that the documented absence of evidence is, indeed, evidence that something is present.

So, I could say -- Extraterrestrial aliens exist because there hasn't been document proof of such yet. 

There's a cure for cancer because nobody's found one yet. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/18/2019 at 1:47 AM, Tacenda said:

Is this a case against the BofM? http://www.ldsdefector.com/fact-1838/?fbclid=IwAR2YeJFRCCV55qdRUJtLoodnDdBfr2i3hlJDAIqiNZfrjP-ThQiUdmI6ZN8

 SPALDING WITNESS

“I left the state of New York, late in the year 1810, and arrived at this place, about the 1st of Jan[uary]. following. Soon after my arrival, I formed a co-partnership with Solomon Spalding, for the purpose of re-building a forge which he had commenced a year or two before. He very frequently read to me from a manuscript which he was writing, which he entitled the ‘Manuscript Found,’ and which he represented as being found in this town. I spent many hours in hearing him read said writings, and became well acquainted with its contents. He wished me to assist him in getting his production printed, alleging that a book of that kind would meet with a rapid sale. I designed doing so, but the forge not meeting our anticipations, we failed in business, when I declined having any thing to do with the publication of the book. This book represented the American Indians as the descendants of the lost tribes, gave an account of their leaving Jerusalem, their contentions and wars, which were many and great. One time, when he was reading to me the tragic account of Laban, I pointed out to him what I considered an inconsistency, which he promised to correct; but by referring to the Book of Mormon, I find to my surprise that it stands there just as he read it to me then.- Some months ago I borrowed the Golden Bible, put it into my pocket, carried it home, and thought no more of it.- About a week after, my wife found the book in my coat pocket, as it hung up, and commenced reading it aloud as I lay upon the bed. She had not read 20 minutes till I was astonished to find the same passages in it that Spalding had read to me more, than twenty years before, from his ‘Manuscript Found.’ Since that, I have more fully examined the said Golden Bible, and have no hesitation in saying that the historical part of it is principally, if not wholly taken from the ‘Manuscript Found.’ I well recollect telling Mr. Spalding, that the so frequent use of the words ‘And it came to pass,’ ‘Now it came to pass,’ rendered it ridiculous. Spalding left here in 1812, and I furnished him the means to carry him to Pittsburgh, where he said he would get the book printed, and pay me. But I never heard any more from him or his writings, till I saw them in the Book of Mormon.”

~Henry Lake, Conneaut, Ashtabula Co. O. September, 1833 – E.D. Howe’s, Mormonism Unvailed, pages 281-282 ~

1838.png

I believe it is part of the case against the Book of Mormon.  

BTW, besides Henry Lake, other family friends provided affidavits about Joseph and the Smith family.  Interesting reading.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/18/2019 at 7:20 AM, tkv said:

This comment isn't serious, is it?  Just some recycled stupidity.  For a recent discussion, see this.

No need to, it's right before my very eyes.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...