Book of Mormon only spiritual

[tld]

The message is also contained in the real history.

That as well as revelation.

[Jeff K.]

With the line taken by the op, prophecies are still prophecies even if they don't occur. I cannot agree with that.

[cinepro]

A little off-topic, but it should also be noted that the doctrine of the spiritual pre-creation is terrifically problematic for the theory of evolution.

[tld]

With the line taken by the op, prophecies are still prophecies even if they don't occur. I cannot agree with that.

I see it somewhat differently. Regardless of when the prophecy was delivered, either during a spiritual creation or again during a physical creation, the BoM, as it was revealed to Joseph Smith, would have been the same.

[sansfoy]

To get back to your point, my suggestion is that the play was written but never performed. The text of the play was delivered to Joseph Smith by revelation. It would be essentially the same as if the play had been acted out in the physical world and someone had written a text of the performance. The play assumes that the characters will have physical bodies, but this does not necessarily mean that the characters in the play were ever actually embodied.

Wouldn't it be possible also that the play was performed, but not in venue that is ordinarily assumed? Just as Joseph Smith thought the events occurred over the breadth of the American Continent and modern thinking postulates a Mesoamerican setting, wouldn't it be hypothetically possible that the setting were actually on some other world entirely? After all, in worlds without number, almost anything would be possible. A party of travelers could set out from Jerusalem and find itself, through supernatural means, practically anywhere.

[Glenn101]

------------------

It is the message of the BoM that seems important. What difference does it make if the message arises out of a spiritual creation and not an actual physical creation if the message remains the same?

Much like a long convoluted parable?

Possible, but again, not scripturally supported.

Glenn

[tld]

Wouldn't it be possible also that the play was performed, but not in venue that is ordinarily assumed? Just as Joseph Smith thought the events occurred over the breadth of the American Continent and modern thinking postulates a Mesoamerican setting, wouldn't it be hypothetically possible that the setting were actually on some other world entirely? After all, in worlds without number, almost anything would be possible. A party of travelers could set out from Jerusalem and find itself, through supernatural means, practically anywhere.

I agree that since the play has been written, it could be performed anywhere at any time. My main focus has been in explaining the BoM. My argument is that the writing of the play (the spiritual creation) provided the content that was revealed to Joseph Smith and became the BoM. It didn't have to be performed, but it could have been or could be.

[cdowis]

Wouldn't it be possible also that the play was performed, but not in venue that is ordinarily assumed? Just as Joseph Smith thought the events occurred over the breadth of the American Continent and modern thinking postulates a Mesoamerican setting, wouldn't it be hypothetically possible that the setting were actually on some other world entirely? After all, in worlds without number, almost anything would be possible. A party of travelers could set out from Jerusalem and find itself, through supernatural means, practically anywhere.

You remind me of someone who postulated that the Lord had removed all the physical evidence for the BOM in order to test us. When I closely questioned this individual, he was a stalking horse -- an antimormon pretending to be a mormon, proposing a nonsense theory.

Please tell us about yourself, someone of four posts.

[cdowis]

Good question. I read it somewhere, but in looking further, I see your point. Here is one link in support of approx. 600 BC.

Regardless of the date, there is no evidence, that I know of, that the Olmec were completely destroyed.

I agree. Many of us postulate that there were remote colonies of the Jaredites who survived, that it was not a complete destruction. This would affect the discussion of DNA and the BOM.

[sansfoy]

You remind me of someone who postulated that the Lord had removed all the physical evidence for the BOM in order to test us. When I closely questioned this individual, he was a stalking horse -- an antimormon pretending to be a mormon, proposing a nonsense theory.

Please tell us about yourself, someone of four posts.

I'm not a stalking horse. Sansfoy = sans foi. I have no faith and, unfortunately, never have. I sometimes wish I were the sort to feel burnings in the bosom. As regards the thought experiment above, I found it interesting.

(I have 4 posts, but about 2,000 on ZLMB. You might remember me from there. We spoke many times, usually in a civil fashion.)

[tld]

A little off-topic, but it should also be noted that the doctrine of the spiritual pre-creation is terrifically problematic for the theory of evolution.

I believe in evolution and also in the existence of a non-material reality which is referred to as the spirit world. I am open to the possibility that spirit beings have influenced the evolutionary process and that there could be ongoing creative activities in the spirit world which may subsequently be of benefit to us here in our physical world. So, personally, I do not see a problem.

[cinepro]

I believe in evolution and also in the existence of a non-material reality which is referred to as the spirit world. I am open to the possibility that spirit beings have influenced the evolutionary process and that there could be ongoing creative activities in the spirit world which may subsequently be of benefit to us here in our physical world. So, personally, I do not see a problem.

I suppose there is the possibility that God evolved generations of plants and animals spiritually first, with millions of years worth of dead-ends, intermediate steps, and extinctions all created in a non-physical form before the spark of evolution was started on the physical planet and the physical manifestations of the lower lifeforms could evolve into the physical manifestations of the already spiritually evolved higher life forms.

This would have extremely interesting ramifications for the aspects of the theory of evolution that deal with physical adaptations.

It would be like my wife asking me to make Nestle Tollhouse cookies. Suppose she gave me a picture of the cookie, but didn't have the recipe. So I have to evolve the cookie. I spend a whole weekend making batch after batch of cookies, each one a little closer to the picture. After 200 batches, I succeed and produce a batch of actual Nestle Tollhouse Cookies.

In this case, the picture of the cookie is the spiritual creation. Each batch of cookies is the physical creation via evolution, culminating in the final product.

The LDS theory is the equivalent of me having the final recipe to begin with (i.e. knowing that the human form is the final step of the physical creation), but instead of making the actual cookies, I instead sit down and write out 200 recipes in advance, carefully planning how each will bring me closer to the final recipe. After writing out the recipes (the spiritual creation of evolution), I then go through and bake each batch, knowing I have 200 batches to go until I get to the final recipe.

Then my wife has company over on Sunday night (Bill and Sue) to enjoy the cookies. I show them the picture of the cookie and share the recipe with them. Then Sue walks into the kitchen and sees evidence of the 200 batches I made in my attempts to evolve the final batch. "But I thought you had the recipe for the final version already!" she exclaims. "Uh, yes. I could have just made the final batch. But the 200 evolutionary batches are just part of my creative process" I explain.

[tld]

In this case, the picture of the cookie is the spiritual creation. Each batch of cookies is the physical creation via evolution, culminating in the final product.

You seem to assume that spirit beings are satisfied with just looking at pictures. Gimme spirit cookies, yum, yum.

... But the 200 evolutionary batches are just part of my creative process" I explain.

How come I'm still only on batch 89?

[cinepro]

You seem to assume that spirit beings are satisfied with just looking at pictures. Gimme spirit cookies, yum, yum.

How come I'm still only on batch 89?

The question is which batch is God on? Is it possible we're not actually the final result of temporal evolution, and we are merely a post-pre-Adamite step on the road to the final version of Physical Tabernacle 1.0?

[tld]

The question is which batch is God on? Is it possible we're not actually the final result of temporal evolution, and we are merely a post-pre-Adamite step on the road to the final version of Physical Tabernacle 1.0?

Deep, profound stuff. My head aches. Going to go to bed.

[tld]

Perhaps I am beating a dead horse, but there are several points I would like to make that may not have been considered. Excluding the Spalding/Rigdon and Joseph-wrote-it hypotheses regarding the origin of the BoM, it is generally accepted that the BoM was received by Joseph Smith through revelation. If the people of the BoM had an actual physical existence and they kept a physical record of that existence which existed somewhere in physical time and space, it would have been necessary for a spirit entity (or entities) to have gained access to that record and translate it into and store it in some kind of "spiritual" format. They would then have had to insert into that record all of the controversial material such as quotes from the King James version of the Bible, etc., before delivering it to JS through his seer stone.

If the source of the BoM came from a spiritual creation, this creation could have taken place at any time (or outside of time) before is was transmitted to JS and thus could easily include all of the controversial material.

To require that the BoM came from an actual physical record written in ancient times adds several layers of complexity that are unnecessary if we accept the possibility that it arose out of a spiritual creation.

[Jeff K.]

Occams razor would have to be extremely dull to accept the premise.

It would also have to exclude revelation (since we saw Heavenly Father in the premortal existence), it would have to include some manner by which the spiritual would suddenly have to become physical and it would have to exclude or put into doubt the coming of the Lord to the Americas, the resurrection and so on......

No. It is simpler and much more clear to place the Book of Mormon as a document that was written during historical times in this life. To have the Lord reveal his desires to the prophets in this life. And to reflect that as time goes by, it seems more and more physical (not spiritual) evidence reflects on what is written in the Book of Mormon, not less.

The whole spiritual theory is a red herring with no evidence to sustain it. If you can show the Old Testament to be such, then you might have an argument. Just as Christ would appear in the US to His people here, to teach and preach the gospel so too, would I reject that he only did it spiritually. Which is incredibly complicated house of cards with no foundation.

[Jeff K.]

What was it Korihor said?

12 And this Anti-Christ, whose name was Korihor, (and the law could have no hold upon him) began to preach unto the people that there should be no Christ. And after this manner did he preach, saying:

13 O ye that are bound down under a foolish and a vain hope, why do ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things? Why do ye look for a Christ? For no man can know of anything which is to come.

14 Behold, these things which ye call prophecies, which ye say are handed down by holy prophets, behold, they are foolish traditions of your fathers.

15 How do ye know of their surety? Behold, ye cannot know of things which ye do not see; therefore ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ.

And what is being said.

Christ never came to the Americas.

The Book of Mormon is only a spiritual manifestation

We are bound by some foolish tradition rather than the truth.

You cannot know the Book of Mormon is true if it took place in a spiritual realm.

Some disturbing paralells. Or am I wrong?

[cdowis]

Perhaps I am beating a dead horse, but there are several points I would like to make that may not have been considered. Excluding the Spalding/Rigdon and Joseph-wrote-it hypotheses regarding the origin of the BoM, it is generally accepted that the BoM was received by Joseph Smith through revelation.

emphasis mine

I have never heard of anyone who believes that. He translated the plates through divine assistance, and the text of the BOM was contained on physical plates.

You are confused, bro

[tld]

emphasis mine

I have never heard of anyone who believes that. He translated the plates through divine assistance, and the text of the BOM was contained on physical plates.

You are confused, bro

However one looks at it, whether there were plates with writing on them or not, and whether they were present or not, the content of the BoM had to be revealed to JS. He did not have the ability to translate on his own. Some source would have had to do the actual translation and make it available to JS. But this does not explain all of the controversial material and the suggestion that the BoM uses 16th and 17th century language. All of this has been discussed ad infinitum and has never been resolved. As difficult a pill as it would be to swallow, the idea that the BoM arose out of a spiritual creation would resolve many, but not all, of the controversial issues. For materialists, neither yours nor mine are acceptable alternatives.

[tld]

Occams razor would have to be extremely dull to accept the premise.

It would also have to exclude revelation (since we saw Heavenly Father in the premortal existence), it would have to include some manner by which the spiritual would suddenly have to become physical and it would have to exclude or put into doubt the coming of the Lord to the Americas, the resurrection and so on......

No. It is simpler and much more clear to place the Book of Mormon as a document that was written during historical times in this life. To have the Lord reveal his desires to the prophets in this life. And to reflect that as time goes by, it seems more and more physical (not spiritual) evidence reflects on what is written in the Book of Mormon, not less.

The whole spiritual theory is a red herring with no evidence to sustain it. If you can show the Old Testament to be such, then you might have an argument. Just as Christ would appear in the US to His people here, to teach and preach the gospel so too, would I reject that he only did it spiritually. Which is incredibly complicated house of cards with no foundation.

It is, I suppose, commendable to have such faith, but in the process you bury your head in the sand to all of the controversial issues associated with the BoM, both its content and its placement in history.

[cinepro]

emphasis mine

I have never heard of anyone who believes that. He translated the plates through divine assistance, and the text of the BOM was contained on physical plates.

You are confused, bro

I'm open to a catalyst theory, wherein the plates served to help open up Joseph's mind to receiving the text of the Book of Mormon, but the text wasn't an actual translation of the markings on the plates.

[tld]

I'm open to a catalyst theory, wherein the plates served to help open up Joseph's mind to receiving the text of the Book of Mormon, but the text wasn't an actual translation of the markings on the plates.

That and possibly as a prop. It is important, perhaps essential, for members of the Church to believe that the BoM is a translation from an ancient record. This gives validity to the book. Besides, Mormons are by nature concrete. Because of this, I can understand why my suggestion is so vigorously rejected. Muslims manage with the Quran being a revelation, but this appears not to be sufficient for LDS.

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 02 August 2010 - 11:33 AM, said:

Occams razor would have to be extremely dull to accept the premise.

It would also have to exclude revelation (since we saw Heavenly Father in the premortal existence), it would have to include some manner by which the spiritual would suddenly have to become physical and it would have to exclude or put into doubt the coming of the Lord to the Americas, the resurrection and so on......

No. It is simpler and much more clear to place the Book of Mormon as a document that was written during historical times in this life. To have the Lord reveal his desires to the prophets in this life. And to reflect that as time goes by, it seems more and more physical (not spiritual) evidence reflects on what is written in the Book of Mormon, not less.

The whole spiritual theory is a red herring with no evidence to sustain it. If you can show the Old Testament to be such, then you might have an argument. Just as Christ would appear in the US to His people here, to teach and preach the gospel so too, would I reject that he only did it spiritually. Which is incredibly complicated house of cards with no foundation.

It is, I suppose, commendable to have such faith, but in the process you bury your head in the sand to all of the controversial issues associated with the BoM, both its content and its placement in history.

You err in suppsoing that you provide a controversial issue. Controversy only exists where proof exists. YOu provided none. You think too much of yourself in that matter. Indeed I do not shy away from the controversy of the Book of Mormon, but that would be legitimate controversy, not pipe dreams or in your case, "spiritual" pipe dreams. You provide nothing in the sense of prophetic endorsement to your idea, nor apostolic, nor even a hint of scriptural direction. In a sense I elevate you when I see the comparisons to Korihor. He at least was able to mold some sort of argument. You have not even done that.

I would suggest you go back and do more research regarding our church before you make such specious claims.

[staccato]

Occams razor would have to be extremely dull to accept the premise........

The whole spiritual theory is a red herring with no evidence to sustain it. If you can show the Old Testament to be such, then you might have an argument. Just as Christ would appear in the US to His people here, to teach and preach the gospel so too, would I reject that he only did it spiritually. Which is incredibly complicated house of cards with no foundation.

Pigs must have grown wings because I totally agree with Jeff K. This kind of mental gymnastics are quite impressive but not at all steeped in reality. You can literally believe in anything using its basic premise.