Joseph Dictated The Book Of Mormon On The Fly?

[consiglieri]

Collaborating, weighing different ideas, taking time to agree, etc., translated into a duration of about four times as long as it should have taken.

This is an important point to take into consideration.

I mentioned before that the Book of Mormon is often airily dismissed by critics as being dictated off the cuff by Joseph Smith, chalking it up to a fertile imagination. This thread reinforces the implausibility of that scenario.

Another frequently heard tack is to say that "others" helped Joseph Smith come up with the Book of Mormon, or the "others" did it themselves and Joseph Smith was merely a front man.

It is generally assumed that attributing the Book of Mormon to "others" makes its existence easier to explain, instead of taking into account the real word verity that the more people who collaborate on an idea, the longer it will take to produce and (by the way), the more subject it will be to plot holes and unraveling structure.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

The stoners, however, would tell me that I have to look beyond the words and take a deeper examination, THEN I could see the genius.

Why do you think they call it LDS, man?

I think you make a good point about the tendency of adherents to find deeper meanings in their religious texts.

But in this thread, we are talking about structural complexities, as opposed to theological or philosphical glosses.

And these structural complexities are pretty obvious, once they are discovered and pointed out.

In other words, I have heard nobody so far positing that this is not an obvious evidence of an undergirding structural design in the Book of Mormon, examples of which it manifests again and again throughout; and most of these structures are those that went unnoticed (or at least unremarked upon) until the last 50 or so years.

If we can come to a general consensus that the Book of Mormon itself evinces a structure that renders implausible the theory that Joseph Smith just dictated it off the top of his head, I think this thread will have served its main purpose.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[cinepro]

It seems like people really have two options for the origin of the book:

- it was created by some very educated people over a fairly long period of time (who decided never to come forward and reveal themselves)

or

- it is of divine origin

I don't see room for a third option. The scripture you pointed out as well as Scottie's time markers are just a few more examples that another option isn't available.

There are many, many other options.

[ThePhy]

The Bible has errors because it has been translated and re-translated by humans many times.

This is not an accurate characterization of why there are Biblical errors. Most modern Bibles are products of essentially a single translation, since translators almost always go back as near as possible to the source manuscripts.

More problematic is the issue of how far removed those manuscripts are from the originals, and what some of the ancient phrasing really was saying.

[Scottie]

If we can come to a general consensus that the Book of Mormon itself evinces a structure that renders implausible the theory that Joseph Smith just dictated it off the top of his head, I think this thread will have served its main purpose.

I would certainly agree with that...with one caveat...

Just because I can't do it and you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done. Perhaps JS had a unique talent that somehow combined mild autism and a photographic memory where he could remember EXACTLY what he had said, even months earlier, and interweave those into an incredible story with amazing precision.

It is highly implausible that a 3 year old child could play Beethoven, but I've seen it several times.

[Fly Fisherman]

I think this is exactly what I'm talking about.

It's almost like stoners who sit around waxing philosophical and thinking that they have unlocked the mysteries of the universe with the lyrics of Dust in the Wind or Stairway to Heaven. The deep symbolic and amazing complexities of those song are just UNREAL!

Now, I don't know about you, but I seem to find those songs rather unimpressive. The stoners, however, would tell me that I have to look beyond the words and take a deeper examination, THEN I could see the genius.

Obviously I'm not saying that you are a stoner nor am I comparing you to one. I just think that when you look hard enough for symbolism and deep meaning, you are going to find it...whether it exists or not.

Show me any religious text where the faithful have not uncovered vast deeper meanings?

I do realize what you are talking about, and fully admit that believers sometimes see too much in the BOM. And critics can do likewise in JS's character, etc. We all do it. Another example is that I was watching one of those documentaries about a movie that was made. The producers of the movie included sets, scenes, etc. that corresponded to the story, the characters, etc. For example, a scene in a movie included a shot of the Brooklyn Bridge. That bridge was included in the scene to reflect the producers' ideas about the personality of the movie's main character - the point is that it was something that few people would realize, but the producers obviously saw it. I think that is what you are trying to say. And yes that does happen. I would be hijacking the thread if I expounded more. As Consig has pointed out, the concrete details are what this thread is about. And I will leave it to discuss that, so as not to hijack more.

[consiglieri]

I would certainly agree with that...with one caveat...

Just because I can't do it and you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done. Perhaps JS had a unique talent that somehow combined mild autism and a photographic memory where he could remember EXACTLY what he had said, even months earlier, and interweave those into an incredible story with amazing precision.

It is highly implausible that a 3 year old child could play Beethoven, but I've seen it several times.

If by this you are suggesting the Book of Mormon is "an incredible story with amazing precision," I will agree with you wholeheartedly and feel content to leave it at that.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[cinepro]

If we can come to a general consensus that the Book of Mormon itself evinces a structure that renders implausible the theory that Joseph Smith just dictated it off the top of his head, I think this thread will have served its main purpose.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

When coming up with different theories regarding the origin of the Book of Mormon, it's always helpful to have a "control" when discussing what is or isn't possible for someone to do on their own.

At the very least, I would suggest looking into another lengthy, complex book dictated by an uneducated housewife under unusual circumstances: The Sorry Tale.

Instead of getting hung up on the specific differences between Joseph Smith and Pearl Curran, we should use the story of Patience Worth to calibrate our expectations for the capabilities of unusual people in unusual circumstances.

No one argues that the dictation of the Book of Mormon is a fantastically unique and amazing feat. But being fantastic and amazing doesn't necessarily mean it happened the way the modern LDS Church claims it did.

[consiglieri]

No one argues that the dictation of the Book of Mormon is a fantastically unique and amazing feat. But being fantastic and amazing doesn't necessarily mean it happened the way the modern LDS Church claims it did.

To the contrary, I have encountered many critics (in fact, I would say the vast majority) who would refrain abstemiously from characterizing the dictation of the Book of Mormon as a "fantastically unique and amazing feat."

And you are correct that simply because it is does not necessarily mean it was translated by divine assistance.

But at least it puts it in the right ballpark!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[cdowis]

Hello consig,

I wouldn't think that there would be to many people who hold the view that JS did come up with the book of mormon off the top of his head.

But what other explanation is there when we consider the "hat method" of translation. Did he read from a manuscript in the hat? Did the hat have a window or candle so he could read the manuscript.

Those who try to address the hat translation method end up using "he did it off the top of his head".

Cinepro, let's compare any part of the "Sorry Tale" with Jacob chapter 5, the book of Mosiah for a start.

[Scottie]

But what other explanation is there when we consider the "hat method" of translation. Did he read from a manuscript in the hat? Did the hat have a window or candle so he could read the manuscript.

Those who try to address the hat translation method end up using "he did it off the top of his head".

Good point.

[consiglieri]

But what other explanation is there when we consider the "hat method" of translation. Did he read from a manuscript in the hat? Did the hat have a window or candle so he could read the manuscript.

Those who try to address the hat translation method end up using "he did it off the top of his head".

This is the proverbial fly in the ointment, the monkey in the wrench.

Thanks for pointing it out.

All the Best!

--Willisieri

[cdowis]

Perhaps JS had a unique talent that somehow combined mild autism and a photographic memory where he could remember EXACTLY what he had said, even months earlier, and interweave those into an incredible story with amazing precision.It is highly implausible that a 3 year old child could play Beethoven, but I've seen it several times.

And members of the community would have been very aware of his unique talents, just as the three year old playing Beethoven.You are assuming that such an astonishing talent would have been hidden from this small farming community, but we hear nothing, nada, even in antimormon literature. This is pure speculation with no factual basis.

This is the proverbial fly in the ointment, the monkey in the wrench.Thanks for pointing it out.All the Best!--Willisieri

Yes, the antis use this as something "laughable", that famous hat. But when I question them further on that hat, they fall silent.

[phaedrus ut]

The other interesting question is why Jesus would quote Deutero-Isaiah to the Nephites with the assumption that they would recognize his words. It's a very strange choice. 3 Nephi 17-20 should be compared to oracle block of Isaiah 52:7-10.

This is Deutero- Isaiah writing in exile about the prospect of a messenger running from Babylon to Jerusalem, the watchmen in Jerusalem catching the eye of the exiles returning and proclaiming a call to praise their return. It's a simple future Oracle written by Second Isaiah in Babylon that God and his people would return to Jerusalem and the city that was once destroyed would be restored. It's also interesting that within 10-20 years of the writing of this passage the Jews returned to Jerusalem after their liberation by Cyrus.

It seems like a off context passage to have Jesus to quote in this situation. The Nephites would be completely unfamiliar with the text, the original meaning of the verses don't seem to match how Jesus is using the words, and the choice to have Jesus use KJV translation of these verses seems questionable.

Phaedrus

[John Larsen]

No doubt the Book of Mormon is an exceptional book. But the question is, does that justify supernatural origins? There have been many great works of art and literature produced by individuals seemingly without the skill or training to do so. Does this necessarily lend divine credence to their work? It seems it does only to those who already believe. We know there are geniuses and prodigies out their, gifts like perfect pitch, photographic memory, and total recall are rare--but not that rare.

The question of how a 25 year old male with access to formal education, newspapers, printed works, libraries, colleges and other resources could produce such a work is not as mysterious as it seems. As to whether the book was dictated from golden plates or not--I don't think we must accept that premise when evaluating the origin of the text.

It may be that the BOM is so sublime and complex that patterns only emerge on close scrutiny. Or it may be that with enough effort, our brains can start to impose patterns and complexity that simply aren't there.

[consiglieri]

No doubt the Book of Mormon is an exceptional book.

I am hearing more praise of the Book of Mormon from critics in this thread than I ever expected to encounter.

I will once again freely admit that just because the Book of Mormon is "an exceptional book" does not necessarily mean it is of divine origin, and be content to leave it at that.

For me, personally, it is an exceptional book that has changed my life.

I will gladly grant to others the freedom to consider it an exceptional book that has not changed theirs.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Scottie]

And members of the community would have been very aware of his unique talents, just as the three year old playing Beethoven.You are assuming that such an astonishing talent would have been hidden from this small farming community, but we hear nothing, nada, even in antimormon literature. This is pure speculation with no factual basis.

BS. Joseph's family said that he was an exceptionally good storyteller.

[gmormon]

...Another frequently heard tack is to say that "others" helped Joseph Smith come up with the Book of Mormon, or the "others" did it themselves and Joseph Smith was merely a front man.

It is generally assumed that attributing the Book of Mormon to "others" makes its existence easier to explain, instead of taking into account the real word verity that the more people who collaborate on an idea, the longer it will take to produce and (by the way), the more subject it will be to plot holes and unraveling structure.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

But the Book of Mormon was written by others Mormon; Moroni, Nephi, the brother of Jared....

[Sandy Petersen]

Some of the LDS defenders here have been arguing that the Book of Mormon is in fact very simple. While the message of the Book of Mormon is often simple, the book itself is exceptionally complicated in its construction. We have multiple authors with different goals, two separate editors, an lengthy unedited section at the beginning, and a "storyline" which involves significant flashbacks and other jumps in time. There are supposedly verbatim quotes at length, paraphases of other works, and a great deal of self-referential material. Plus much of the book assumes that the reader has access to the Nephite version of the Old Testament. Which we don't.

I read a lot and I own a library composed of thousands of books. I don't own any other book which is anywhere as near unusually put together as the Book of Mormon. I'm not saying this is evidence for divine origin, but it is certainly an extremely unusual book. Uniquely so in my experience.

The Book of Zelph and The Sorry Tale are not at the same level and I'm familiar with both.

[hagoth7]

Some of the LDS defenders here have been arguing that the Book of Mormon is in fact very simple...

Sandy,

? If so, I missed that.

So far, those that I've noticed arguing for simplicity are all Book of Mormon critics...

[Rommelator]

Joseph's family said that he was an exceptionally good storyteller.

They also said that he could hardly dictate a small letter worth his life. And yet we are supposed to believe that he dictated the whole Book of Mormon in 3 months. Right...

As to whether the book was dictated from golden plates or not--I don't think we must accept that premise when evaluating the origin of the text.

In other words, we should just totally disregard what Joseph Smith said a pander for alternate theories that deny anything supernatural. Of course you would be in good company with the likes of Dale Morgan, who said that he would accept any explanation other than Joseph Smith's, or Sterling McMurrin, who flatly denied the possibility of angels giving people books.

But hey, I am told that this is the "scholarly and objective" method to use when evaluating Mormonism and the claims of Joseph Smith. Namely; disregard anything Joseph Smith said.

[Rommelator]

Muhammad had less education than JS and he wrote the Qur'an.

... over the course of almost 20 years. Really, the Qur'an is more like the D&C than the Book of Mormon, in that sections of it were given to Muhammad at different times and under different circumstances. But not so with the Book of Mormon. With this remarkable book, we have Joseph Smith dictate almost 12 pages a day (IIRC) nonstop with no corrections, editing, going back or rewrites.

Of course, Joseph just also happens to get exceedingly complex chiasmus and other ancient hebraisms in his text as he is dictating, but I am sure that his extensive study of biblical Hebrew gave him that.

[Scottie]

Of course, Joseph just also happens to get exceedingly complex chiasmus and other ancient hebraisms in his text as he is dictating, but I am sure that his extensive study of biblical Hebrew gave him that.

Again, refer to the stoners unlocking the secrets of the universe in Stairway to Heaven...

[ThePhy]

They also said that he could hardly dictate a small letter worth his life. And yet we are supposed to believe that he dictated the whole Book of Mormon in 3 months. Right...

But Scottie said: â??Joseph's family said that he was an exceptionally good storyteller.â?

Is the Book of Mormon more like a letter, or a story? Looks pretty storyish, and pretty unletterish to me.

[consiglieri]

But Scottie said: â??Joseph's family said that he was an exceptionally good storyteller.â?

Is the Book of Mormon more like a letter, or a story? Looks pretty storyish, and pretty unletterish to me.

You are right, of course . . . except for the numerous letters in it.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri