Metal Records--Was the Notion Preposterous in Joseph Smith's Day?

[jskains]

You know, it was funny. A whole topic on bashing you, Bill. . And this guy got a voice at the increasingly liberal/anti-LDS funfest of Sunstone. A whole session just for him and his overly smug photo.

JMS

[Jeff K.]

Apparently the stoners have way too much time on their hands. As stoners often do.

[Anijen]

hmmm, am I noticing a pattern here on those little green circles with the plus sign in them at the bottom right of the screen? It appears Hamblin is winning this debate, which IMO seems obvious even without the "vote this post up" button.

[jskains]

hmmm, am I noticing a pattern here on those little green circles with the plus sign in them at the bottom right of the screen? It appears Hamblin is winning this debate, which IMO seems obvious even without the "vote this post up" button.

So if we all agree Hambin has a better argument, will Mr. Reed alter his lecture before the Sunstone conference?

JMS

[Anijen]

So if we all agree Hambin has a better argument, will Mr. Reed alter his lecture before the Sunstone conference?

JMS

Don't hold your breath IOW not likely.

[Mike Reed]

Apparently the stoners have way too much time on their hands. As stoners often do.

An ironic thing to say for a guy with this under his name:

Posts: 6866

Joined: 31-December 08

[Jeff K.]

So if we all agree Hambin has a better argument, will Mr. Reed alter his lecture before the Sunstone conference?

JMS

If he does, he risks being stoned.

[jskains]

An ironic thing to say for a guy with this under his name:

Posts: 6866

Joined: 31-December 08

Depends. Are they interesting ones or ones that are trying to strain for gnats?

JMS

[Jeff K.]

An ironic thing to say for a guy with this under his name:

Posts: 6866

Joined: 31-December 08

Yes, quality and quantity are so hard to find. Take for example the number of posts you have, and yet, the quaility appears to have reached famine levels.....

While milk and meat are subjects of import, tares seem to be a specialty of stoners. One should hang with what one knows best.

[Bill Hamblin]

And according to Nibley this new archeological evidence is supposed to contradict what the critics said in "Joseph Smith's day." Now... unless you can cite certain critics contemporary to Joseph Smith, taking issue with all of these extra details which you propose are so central to Nibley's point... it will continue to appear to me that you are just obfuscating the issue.

You are mis-Reeding again. Nibley is showing archaeological evidence that now confirms the description of the metal plates found in the BOM and by JS in terms of material, size, script, binding, and social function. It is not about the question of whether any writing on metal plates existed in ancient times.

Not everyone who has ever written on the subject is engaging the idea on which you are fixated, Reed. Why can't you understand this?

it will continue to appear to me that you are just obfuscating the issue.

Of course, it has become clear that how the situation appears to you and reality are often two distinct things.

[Mike Reed]

It is not about the question of whether any writing on metal plates existed in ancient times.

The "description" that Nibley focuses his efforts on validating with archeological evidence pertains to the material of the plates: Metal.

Here are other quotes from Nibley:

"By now the discovery of writing on plates of precious metal, once the hardest thing to swallow in Joseph Smith's story, has become almost common place in the Near East." (The Prophetic Book of Mormon, 76)

"Joseph Smith's insistence on books made of metal plates was a favorite target of his detractors; metal plates were strange enough to seem ludicrous, and impractical enough to cause difficulties." (The Prophet Book of Mormon, 76)

Again... the common theme between Nibley quotes: Joseph Smith was mocked more than anything else for the MATERIAL on which the record was said to be inscribed.

[Mike Reed]

Bump

Finally, it now appears that the debate has degenerated into quibbling over the meaning of "highly educated." If I had said "well-educated" would that make Reed happy? Or would just "educated" have been acceptable?

No. Because you also said "specialist."

So, to avoid endless quibbling, I'll withdraw the term "highly," and clarify my position.

You need to withdraw the word "specialist" too.

Next quibble. You say clarify, I say change. Discuss...

[Jeff K.]

Was the context of those quotes Old World or New World?

Metal Plates & Stone Boxes

Joseph Smith claimed that the Book of Mormon record was inscribed on metal plates and buried in a stone box in a hill now referred to as the Hill Cumorah. Since their discovery the critics have ridiculed this claim. The critics, in fact, were very adamant that the claim of sacred writings on metal plates was proof of fraud. In 1887, for instance, one critic who made his conclusions supposedly

[Nemesis]

Knock off the personal attacks.

Nemesis

[Mike Reed]

Are these criticisms from the time untrue

Yes. They are untrue.

If these were common crticisms, it would seem that it was commonly thought to be impossilbe.

Again...we are talking about contemporary sources. Nibley said "in Joseph Smith's day." The only source that could strickly be called "contemporary" is LaRoy Sunderland's comment (1838)... which I have already cited early on in this thread. This is not enough to generalize and presume that the idea was thought preposterous in his day. It wasn't.

or are you ignoring them?

Nope. But it appears you have ingored my posts indicating my position. Go back to page one and read again.

[Jeff K.]

The criticism were true in the sense that they legitimately occurred during a time when few if any thought your assertion was valid.

While the criticism is incorrect, it is only in the sense that their attacks were incorrect, but not the general feeling of the time that such a view was impossible.

If you found one book on plate tectonics in Joseph Smith's time, and yet thousands speaking of volcanic movement. Do you then conclude that Joseph Smith must have been aware of plate tectonics? Isn't that a rather rash and unproveable assertion given the preponderance of the evidence that such information was either held in low regard or discounted in general?

And if it were discounted in general, why would a farmboy use it?

[Mike Reed]

The criticism were true in the sense that they legitimately occurred during a time when few if any thought your assertion was valid.

While the criticism is incorrect, it is only in the sense that their attacks were incorrect, but not the general feeling of the time that such a view was impossible.

If you found one book on plate tectonics in Joseph Smith's time, and yet thousands speaking of volcanic movement. Do you then conclude that Joseph Smith must have been aware of plate tectonics? Isn't that a rather rash and unproveable assertion given the preponderance of the evidence that such information was either held in low regard or discounted in general?

And if it were discounted in general, why would a farmboy use it?

I am not going to rewrite what has already been posted in this thread. Again... go back to page one and reread the thread.

[Jeff K.]

I have. And you ignore the mass of books on the subject of no plates seeking that one book to support you. And from that you build your entire universe. Tis a fragile thing, no?

[Jeff K.]

double post

[Mike Reed]

I have. And you ignore the mass of books on the subject of no plates seeking that one book to support you. And from that you build your entire universe. Tis a fragile thing, no?

Please post more coherently.

[Jeff K.]

Are you stating that it was generally accepted in the time of Joseph Smith, not only generally, but vastly prevalent, that metal plates did indeed exist? Or are you plucking the goose feather from a chicken coop?

Is that more coherent for you?

[Mike Reed]

Are you stating that it was generally accepted in the time of Joseph Smith, not only generally, but vastly prevalent, that metal plates did indeed exist?

I believe that the notion of ancient Metal records was widely dispersed and available in Joseph Smith's environment. Those who rejected the notion in Joseph Smith's day would have been a small minority. It is an exaggeration for Mormon apologists/scholars to claim that the notion was so preposterous in Smith's day. It wasn't. Very few of Joseph's contemporary critics rejected the idea of ancients inscribing metal records.

[Ariarates]

I'll make one other observation. For Reed's method to be taken seriously he has to provide a list of hits and misses. That is to say, if 100 books exist that mention ancient writing, and 50 of them mention writing on metal it is much more significant than if only 10 of the 100 books mention ancient writing on metal. So if Reed wants his study to be taken seriously, he has to incorporate this comparative data. The data of hits alone is not statistically significant.

Great observation, I'm adding this to my sig line. Might come in handy one day when discussing BoM historicity.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Very few of Joseph's contemporary critics rejected the idea of ancients inscribing metal records.

Can we move on? I don't think anyone is denying this. And Yes, I have been reading just about every post in this thread.

[Mike Reed]

Can we move on? I don't think anyone is denying this. And Yes, I have been reading just about every post in this thread.

I would love to. Strange that Jeff K even asked the question.