The Bible versus the Book of Mormon

[Dale]

I am actually shocked and bewildered at how many of you believe this to be any good.  Its the saddest rebuttal I have ever read up to now, its up to par with a response given by Michael W. Fordham which was knocked out on their rebuttal in:

Mormonism 201: Chapter 16

No, yours is the "saddest" nonrebuttal. Point and smirk. Point and smirk. If you are writing a rebuttal you should easily be able to provide a few lines of that writing. Yet you provide nothing. Point and smirk isn't working well for you guys anymore.

I think the horses hit is going to be devastating to the countermos methodology. It was on their top ten list of point and smirk bullet points. They will ignore it as if they had never been made to look like blithering idiots yukking away at the very idea there might be new discoveries to their already complete world. But it will be exhibit one for scholars. This is not going to be pretty.

I have heard some at FAIR read the rebuttal material at Mormonism Researched Ministry & was not impressed. They didn't feel a rebuttal was needed at that time. I wasn't all that impressed myself. I am really awaiting the response to the Pearl of Great Price sections of Mormonism 201. Mormonism 101 by Bill Mckeever & Eric Johnson is truly a horrible book.

I feel the review of Bible vs, the Book of Mormon is quite good. I read it carefully last night & I feel it's conclusions are quite sound.

[dacook]

"In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites, say less than thirty, entered such a massive native population, it would be very hard to detect their genes today."  -- Simon Southerton

This is a great quote. May I have the source reference, please?

I would like to use it in a certain ongoing offline debate I'm having with a certain Harvard PhD who thinks he's smarter than he is. Thanks.

[Daniel Peterson]

"In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites, say less than thirty, entered such a massive native population, it would be very hard to detect their genes today."  -- Simon Southerton

This is a great quote. May I have the source reference, please?

I would like to use it in a certain ongoing offline debate I'm having with a certain Harvard PhD who thinks he's smarter than he is. Thanks.

Blake Ostler cites it from Simon Southerton in his (Ostler's) excellent letter to the editor in the current issue of Sunstone, which is up on the Sunstone web site. I believe that Blake got it from something that Southerton had posted on the Signature Books web site, but I haven't yet taken the trouble to track down the original. I do think, though, that, in the quotation, Southerton pretty well concedes the basic point that all of the FARMS writers on DNA, and many other Latter-day Saints, have been making.

[Calm]

Allow me: original cite

It's at the beginning of Section 7.

And here is Blake Ostler's letter to the editor (starts on page 4): http://www.sunstoneonline.com/magazine/issues/139/02-08.pdf

[Bob Bennett]

If we're taking a poll on the quality of Brant's review, here's another vote for 'very good'. I find it difficult to believe that anyone could possibly find it the saddest review of all time, even if they disagree with it - of course nothing was cited to show exactly why it was the saddest review of all time.

Thanks, very much Brant for the review. I caught many of the errors/misrepresentations that you discussed when I watched the video, but you brought up many additional ones that I hadn't seen, or hadn't known enough to catch. I'm now debating whether or not to drop off a copy of the review to my neighbors here in Brigham City, who were shown in the opening scene, and who are ardent supporters and members of the congregation of the Living Hope Ministry.

[Daniel Peterson]

I'm now debating whether or not to drop off a copy of the review to my neighbors here in Brigham City, who were shown in the opening scene, and who are ardent supporters and members of the congregation of the Living Hope Ministry.

I think you should do it. Of course, I'm seldom one to counsel restraint. They need to know -- and Living Hope Ministries needs to know -- that their movie doesn't pass scrutiny, and that that fact has now been made public.

And, incidentally, the scrutiny isn't over yet.

P.S. -- Thanks, calmoriah.

[Calm]

Anytime, I'm practically always here,

[Dale]

The scrutiny should be ongoing. I am sure it won't be the last Living Hope Ministry production. These films do get shown in churches. Eastside Baptist Church in Independence, Missouri showed the DNA vs. the Book of Mormon film. Not sure of whether the Bible vs, the Book of Mormon will be seen in many churches, but it's possible. And I am sure it has had a lot of in home viewings.

[Brant Gardner]

Dan Peterson:

and Living Hope Ministries needs to know

The day after the review was posted I recevied a very pleasant email from Jim Catlin of Living Hope Ministries. He said that they were "entertained and relieved" with the review.

He noted that they will make some changes concerning the citation of horses using Isaiah rather than the Book of Mormon and take more care with the illustration from the Book of Mormon about horses.

He also indicated "We are glad that our oversight did not obscure the New World assertions made by the Book of Mormon in this regard."

[Daniel Peterson]

The day after the review was posted I recevied a very pleasant email from Jim Catlin of Living Hope Ministries. He said that they were "entertained and relieved" with the review.

"Entertained and relieved"? A time-honored bit of bravado favored by authors, producers, and others who have just taken a direct hit amidships. Not unlike the popular exclamation among small boys playing "cops and robbers" or "cowboys and Indians": "You missed me! You missed me!"

[Dale]

It will be interesting to see whether the Living Hope Ministry people put up a review of the review.

I do think the Living Hope Ministry folks are good people. Certainly the films are vastly better than Ed Deckers the Godmakers.

[e=mc2]

Oh I wouldn't say vastly Dale............

[Dale]

Vastly perhaps is an overstatement. It's still a far better film than the Godmakers.

[solomarineris]

Hamblin writes on animals;

1. A species may have existed only in small numbers-introduced by, and limited to the civilizations of the Nephites-which subsequently became extinct.

I don't have to wonder what scientific response would be... His theories are full of utopian concepts, which wouldn't go any farther than Utah Co. No matter how creative he is he cannot save his ideas from demise.

I feel bad for him and others who believe this make believe history that has absolutely no shred of evidence.

[dacook]

Allow me: original cite

It's at the beginning of Section 7.

And here is Blake Ostler's letter to the editor (starts on page 4): http://www.sunstoneonline.com/magazine/issues/139/02-08.pdf

Thanks, those will both be useful.

[Dale]

What's the source for Hamblins statement so I can look it up?

[Daniel Peterson]

Hamblin writes on animals;

1. A species may have existed only in small numbers-introduced by, and limited to the civilizations of the Nephites-which subsequently became extinct.

I don't have to wonder what scientific response would be...

I don't either. The idea that a species of flora or fauna might have been introduced in small numbers by an immigrant group and then lost to extinction is so obviously true -- I need only consult my own attempts at gardening for confirmation -- that the scientific response is obvious.

His theories are full of utopian concepts, which wouldn't go any farther than Utah Co. No matter how creative he is he cannot save his ideas from demise.

You slander people outside Utah County when you suggest that they lack the intelligence and common sense to follow Professor Hamblin's point.

I grew up altogether outside of Utah, and have spent a great deal of time well beyond its boundaries, and I can assure you that there are many bright and well educated people outside of Utah County.

I feel bad for him and others who believe this make believe history that has absolutely no shred of evidence.

Cheer up! There's no need to feel bad. You're wrong.

[Calm]

Dale: Hamblin quote

That's strange--the FARMS site didn't come up in the search, but the link is available on another page of this thread.

Original site of Hamblin's article

[asciikerr]

I am actually shocked and bewildered at how many of you believe this to be any good.  Its the saddest rebuttal I have ever read up to now, its up to par with a response given by Michael W. Fordham which was knocked out on their rebuttal in:

Mormonism 201: Chapter 16

No, yours is the "saddest" nonrebuttal. Point and smirk. Point and smirk. If you are writing a rebuttal you should easily be able to provide a few lines of that writing. Yet you provide nothing. Point and smirk isn't working well for you guys anymore.

I started my critique of the rebuttal on Friday, and I rarely touch the computer on the weekends...but I may just be able to finish mine up this evening (God Willingly). I will not be posting as some theologian, apologist or scholar...but only as a common man who notices the glaring problems of a rebuttal that should have reflected actual real-world evidence for the Book of Mormon such as; coinage, spears, human remains, ancient texts, destroyed cities, something...anything other than a good argument for what has yet to be discovered.

Its sad really, for all the proofs and evidences the LDS believer is willing to accept concerning the Book of Mormon, it is still not enough even for their own Church to endorse in the same manner. Yet that doesn't seem to hinder the believer from being so quick and willing to accept what their own Church won't stand by or support. Its almost as if the believer has more faith in the apologists and evidences found to support the Book of Morman than the Church itself.

===============A SAMPLE OF WHAT I'M WRITING======

Cities

The Illusion: The film clearly shows how Biblical cities have retained their names throughout Biblical times, which is contrasted with those of the Book of Mormon. They even enforce this by showing a vast amount of cities still retaining their names: City of David, Jerusalem, Bethlehem etc., This is further enforced with the use of expert archaeologists from Guatemala which states,

[livy111us]

If that is some of your "good" material, watch out LDS Church, here comes your downfall [sarcasm]. I really hope the rest of your material is much better than this.

[Confidential Informant]

Dan Peterson:

and Living Hope Ministries needs to know

The day after the review was posted I recevied a very pleasant email from Jim Catlin of Living Hope Ministries. He said that they were "entertained and relieved" with the review.

He noted that they will make some changes concerning the citation of horses using Isaiah rather than the Book of Mormon and take more care with the illustration from the Book of Mormon about horses.

He also indicated "We are glad that our oversight did not obscure the New World assertions made by the Book of Mormon in this regard."

This response reminds me of the response by another author whose "excesses" were recently exposed.

After the Smoking Gun website debunked his claims, author James Frey posted on his web site:

...So let the haters hate, let the doubters doubt, I stand by my book, and my life, and I won't dignify this [expletive deleted] with any sort of further response."

See here.

It didn't work for him either.

C.I.

[urroner]

I can walk through many of the places mentioned in Greek mythology and literature, therefore, Greek mythology must be true.

So asciiker, when should we erect the next temple to Zeus and Venus. Can I do the one for Venus please, please, please?

[asciikerr]

I can walk through many of the places mentioned in Greek mythology and literature, therefore, Greek mythology must be true.

So asciiker, when should we erect the next temple to Zeus and Venus. Can I do the one for Venus please, please, please?

So what your saying is...Greek Fantasy Literature is more believable than the stories and places found in the Book of Mormon simply because the places written about in Greek Mythology actually exist, as opposed to the the Lands based off the Book of Mormon?

The whole point of the video is that it takes blind faith to be an LDS Believer.

With the Bible, we see the cultures, we see the lands, the peoples, their customs, traditions, way of life...what we read in the Bible concerning the LAWS and Traditions is still widely practiced today by the Jewish People. We have countless of historical sights, landmarks, cities, artifacts, ancient texts, human remains, etc.

The Church remains silent while its defenders of the faith display endless "possibilities" for proof. Its the story of a theory being seen as fact in the eyes of those that portray it as truth.

The Video & its critics beckon at a question that has yet to be answered:

Where is the solid evidence for the Book of Mormon?

[Confidential Informant]

With the Bible, we see the cultures, we see the lands, the peoples, their customs, traditions, way of life...what we read in the Bible concerning the LAWS and Traditions is still widely practiced today by the Jewish People. We have countless of historical sights, landmarks, cities, artifacts, ancient texts, human remains, etc.

The Church remains silent while its defenders of the faith display endless "possibilities" for proof. Its the story of a theory being seen as fact in the eyes of those that portray it as truth.

Once again from my atheist friend: "What does that prove except that the Bible is a really old fraud?"

C.I.

[Daniel Peterson]

The whole point of the video is that it takes blind faith to be an LDS Believer.

If that's really the whole point of the video, it's even worse than I thought it was when I watched it.

I've always loved it, though, when evangelicals and fundamentalists, who believe in parted Red Seas, floating axe heads, water changing into wine, multiplying loaves and fishes, dead people coming back to life, talking jackasses and talking snakes (well, maybe those aren't so implausible), walking staffs turning into serpents, virgin births, women turning into columns of salt, walking on top of lakes, and scores of other such things, point a scornful finger at Latter-day Saints for believing in things that require faith.

As far as the Church "remaining silent" or declining to "endorse" any particular arguments for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, why should it? As one of those who has been centrally involved in publishing arguments defending the Book of Mormon, I've never asked for Church endorsement, don't expect it, have no idea what it would look like, and, frankly, wouldn't welcome it. Scholarly arguments stand or fall as scholarly arguments, and they are seldom if ever fully certain. They never rise to the level of "doctrine," such that the Church should "endorse" them. Just as the Church should never grant its authority to any particular scientific doctrine (as the Roman Catholic Church learned with Galileo), it should never endorse any particular academic argument.

Finally, ascikerr, I would be interested in your reasoned and documented response to William J. Hamblin's "Basic Methodological Problems with the Anti-Mormon Approach to the Geography and Archaeology of the Book of Mormon," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/1 (Spring 1993) pp. 161-197. Professor Hamblin seems, rather prophetically, to have had you in mind when he wrote his article:

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=39