The Book Of Moses Bullseye

[Cobalt-70]

And when someone argues that Joseph must have been influenced by whatever book, such as Thomas Di_ck's Philosophy of a Future State or any other, on no other basis than that similar ideas appear in both places, then they are clearly relying upon circular argument.

Not just similarity. (1) Nearly identical ideas, which do not seem to appear elsewhere other than the works of Smith and D!ck, (2) borrowed terminology like "immensity of space" or "intelligences," and (3) proven access to the book in the relevant time period.

[Mike Reed]

Hang on, I'm just lacing up my sprigs so that I can catch up with those goal posts.

<chuckle> No goalposts are moving, Pahoran. Those are windmills, and moving is what they are designed to do.

A "bull's eye" is a direct hit in the middle of the target.

Competitive sports/games don't set targets (with bull’s-eyes) at distances that require no skill to hit. The purpose of a bull’s-eye is to test a person's skill level.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Mike Reed

[Doctor Steuss]

I would suggest that for "worlds without number" to be a bulls-eye for the Book of Moses, it would have to be shown that the idea is both true and novel. Can someone show this?

H.

IMO (and I'm sure this opinion is in the minority... and probably for good reason), to be a bulls-eye, it would need to be shown to be something both ancient, and attributed (by early Israelites or possibly other Abrahamic religions) to Moses.

I think the truth of it is a far second, and potentially not a “bulls-eye” indicator at all when dealing with holy writ. If the Book of Moses were to say that this was the only world created (in lieu of “worlds without number”), then believers of the book’s divine origins would likely reinterpret the passage to one of symbolic prominence instead of statement of fact.

Although the belief in innumerable worlds in the universe hasn’t been shown to be a common belief within the Smith household, I think that the belief has been demonstrated to not be a completely foreign concept during the time; therefore, without an ancient parallel, the passage is akin to claiming that since 3 Nephi 13:30 mentions "grass of the fields" and today we know that fields have grass, the passage is a bulls-eye.**

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

**This example is extreme hyperbole, but right now I’m too lazy to put in the effort for a more appropriate example. I apologize in advance, and am deserving of all of the verbal smack-downs that are likely to ensue. Also, it was an epic run-on sentence, and deserves an award.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Doctor Steuss

[Cobalt-70]

I would suggest that for "worlds without number" to be a bulls-eye for the Book of Moses, it would have to be shown that the idea is both true and novel. Can someone show this?

The idea is certainly not novel. A search in Google Books turns up many hits prior to 1830 for even the exact phrase "worlds without number." For example, one prominent Vermont Congregationalist pastor published a sermon in 1827 in The American Evangelist stating:

"And these

worlds without number

, we have every reason to conclude, judging from analogy, are peopled with intelligences immortal like ourselves."

http://books.google....YfzroC&pg=PA187. So this idea was in circulation even among New England clergy.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Cobalt-70

[Mike Reed]

"When we lift up our eyes to the Heavens, we are still more amazed at the sight of so many such worlds, composing the planetary system. The Comets, which surround our Sun, greatly increase our amazement by their numbers, the velocity of their motions, and the inconceivable extent of their circuits. It is still more enhanced by the union of these numerous worlds in one vast system, connected by a common center, and revolving around the center with a harmony, and splendor, worthy of a God. But this system, great and wonderful as it is, is a mere speck, compared with the real extent of the Creation. Satisfactory evidence exists,, that every staff, which twinkles in the firmament, is no other than a Sun, a world of light, surrounded by its own attendant planets, formed into a system similar to ours. Forty five thousand such stars have been counted, by the aid of the Herschellian Telescope, in so small part of the Heavens, that supposing this part to be sown no thicker than the rest, the same Telescope would reach at least seventy-five millions in the whole sphere. By means of new improvements in the same optical instrument, they have been found to be numerous to a degree still more astonishing. Everyone one of these is, in my view, rationally concluded to be the Sun, and Centre, of a system of planetary and cometary worlds. Beyond this, I think it not at all improbable that, were we transported to the most distant of the visible stars, we should find there a firmament expanding over our heads, studded in the same manner with stars innumerable. Nay, were we to repeat the same flight, and be again wafted through the same distance, it is not improbable, that we should behold a new repetition of the same sublimity and glory. In this manner immensity appears, in a sense, to be peopled with worlds innumerable, consisting the boundless empire of Jehovah. How amazing, then, must be the power and greatness of Him, who not only telleth the number of the stars, and calleth them all by their names, but with a word spoke them all into being." Timothy Dwight, Theology Explained and Defended vol 1 sermon vii (Middleton, Conn, 1818 ), 108-109.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Mike Reed

[mfbukowski]

But here's the deal: If we want a scriptural statement of apparent scientific evidence to count as a scriptural "bullseye" and therefore evidence of the authenticity of scripture, do we then also want scriptural errors about scientific facts to count as "misses" and count against the authenticity of scripture?

This is going down the wrong road imo- to me, both operate in different spheres having nothing to do with each other. Each is in a sense a "metaphor" of its own type for its own purposes and should not be confused with one another, or the uses of each, any more than we would use a screwdriver as a pipe wrench

[Calm]

For me, the value of what Joseph taught has nothing to do with any scientific theories, but rather how such teachings tie men on this world to the rest of the universe.

[zeez]

I love this verse because it describes a universe that completely exceeded the science and the known cosmos of the 1830's. In fact, it wasn't until the 1950's that we discovered our milky way galaxy wasn't alone in the universe.

Here is another bullseye:

And as for goodness, what an infinite fulness of life and being, what an immense, inexaustible tresury of all good, must that be, from whence all this life and being was derived! How infinitely rich is the glorious and eternal God! Out of his own fulness he hath brought worlds and worlds, replenished with myriads and myriads of creatures, furnished with various powers and organs, capacities and instincts; and out of his own fulness continually and plentifully supplieth them with all the necessaries of existence. And still his fulness remaineth the same, unemptied, unimpaired; and he can yet bring out of his fulness worlds and worlds without end. How immensely full of all life and being is the glorious and eternal God!

"A Collection of Theological Tracts", Richard Watson. Vol. I, Chapter 4. 1791

[Mike Reed]

mfbukowski and calmoriah, thank you for both of your comments.

Nice one, Zeez. Yeah... these sort of quotes are all over the place in 18th and 19th century publications.

[KevinG]

mfbukowski and calmoriah, thank you for both of your comments.

Nice one, Zeez. Yeah... these sort of quotes are all over the place in 18th and 19th century publications.

Perhaps others were tapping into the same stream of revelation and knowledge that Joseph was? I don't see where the LDS ever claimed to be the sole repository of revelation or that others knowing about these things negates Joseph's getting it right.

[zeez]

I agree that other people were indeed tapping the same source that Joseph Smith tapped. Interesting how they were tapped during the apostasy. We shouldn't be surprised by this. Just because apostates can write glorious and divine truths doesn't mean the prophets were any less of prophets. It simply means apostates are cooler than we originally thought.

[KevinG]

I agree that other people were indeed tapping the same source that Joseph Smith tapped. Interesting how they were tapped during the apostasy. We shouldn't be surprised by this. Just because apostates can write glorious and divine truths doesn't mean the prophets were any less of prophets. It simply means apostates are cooler than we originally thought.

Check into LDS writings and teachings about the reformation. You may be surprised.

[zeez]

Are you telling me Mormons always considered apostates to be cool? Hmm, well maybe you are right.

[why me]

Are you telling me Mormons always considered apostates to be cool? Hmm, well maybe you are right.

They thought martin luther was cool. The lds give him a lot of credit for the reformation. And I do believe that JS gave a lot of credit to methodism. But are they apostates? Maybe in the loose meaning of the word. But they are still cool in lds understandings of the reformation as various religions embraced portions of the truth.

[KevinG]

Are you telling me Mormons always considered apostates to be cool? Hmm, well maybe you are right.

I'm saying Mormons think lots of people besides Mormons are cool. I don't use the term apostate to describe anyone other than someone who knowingly fights against or subverts their former belief system.

You sound like you are feigning victim-hood at the hands of the in'tolrent Murmans.

Edited December 23, 2011 by DaddyG

[why me]

I agree that other people were indeed tapping the same source that Joseph Smith tapped. Interesting how they were tapped during the apostasy. We shouldn't be surprised by this. Just because apostates can write glorious and divine truths doesn't mean the prophets were any less of prophets. It simply means apostates are cooler than we originally thought.

I am sure that Joseph read the book you quoted from. His library was quite large between apostates and mobs burning his various and humble homes. But I never knew him to be traveling with a large library as he and emma were moved from place to place. But I could be mistaken.

[KevinG]

I am sure that Joseph read the book you quoted from. His library was quite large between apostates and mobs burning his various and humble homes. But I never knew him to be traveling with a large library as he and emma were moved from place to place. But I could be mistaken.

Joseph had a veritable library of Alexandria in that hat of his.

[why me]

mfbukowski and calmoriah, thank you for both of your comments.

Nice one, Zeez. Yeah... these sort of quotes are all over the place in 18th and 19th century publications.

I don't remember if anyone said they weren't. However they are in lds scripture and that seems to make a lot of difference for other christian faiths now.

[why me]

Joseph had a veritable library of Alexandria in that hat of his.

It is amazing. I don't know how the critics understand JS getting all his ideas. What sources did he read between home burnings and forced moves? The guy was a first rate genius and a christian revolutionary for the ideas he implanted into christianity. (if he were a fraudster)

Or a prophet if not.

[zeez]

God was constantly whispering in his ear... possibly even more than he whispered in Jesus' ear.

Your schtick is getting tiresome. Drive-by posters don't last long here.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Minos

[why me]

God was constantly whispering in his ear... possibly even more than he whispered in Jesus' ear.

If god was constantly whispering into his ear, he wouldn't be able to live his life and learn from his experience as any other human being. Prophets are not that special that they get a free pass in life. The must also live and learn as they go. Trial and error work for them too.

Edited December 23, 2011 by why me

[Cobalt-70]

I am sure that Joseph read the book you quoted from. His library was quite large between apostates and mobs burning his various and humble homes. But I never knew him to be traveling with a large library as he and emma were moved from place to place. But I could be mistaken.

There is no need to prove that Smith actually read any of these books. It is enough to show that these ideas were circulating in Smith's day. For the "worlds without number" idea, Smith could easily have heard this from clergy, from newspaper articles, from books in one of the Palmyra bookstores, from Oliver Cowdery, from Luman Walter, from his father, or from any number of people who would have shared Smith's interests in astrology and/or cosmology.

[Peppermint Patty]

More evidence today for The Book of Moses:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/11/10115679-160-billion-planets-in-the-milky-way

From the article:

"We used to think that the Earth might be unique in our galaxy," Daniel Kubas, a colleague of Cassan's at the Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris and a co-author of the Nature paper, said in a news release from the European Southern Observatory. "But now it seems that there are literally billions of planets with masses similar to Earth orbiting stars in the Milky Way."

[Xander]

More evidence today for The Book of Moses:

http://cosmiclog.msn...n-the-milky-way

From the article:

"We used to think that the Earth might be unique in our galaxy," Daniel Kubas, a colleague of Cassan's at the Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris and a co-author of the Nature paper, said in a news release from the European Southern Observatory. "But now it seems that there are literally billions of planets with masses similar to Earth orbiting stars in the Milky Way."

I think Mike Reed already pointed out that it was common belief during Joseph Smith's day that there were other worlds out there. I don't think this has ever been in doubt. What science hasn't been able to show is that there are billions of worlds that are actually inhabitable or could sustain life of any kind. In fact, there is no solid evidence for extraterrestrial life of any kind. It isn't enough to say there are other planets. We know this. But so far it seems these places are way too cold or way too hot to sustain life.

Now if science was to really show something that supported the beliefs of the early Mormon prophets, then it would have to show that people have been living on the moon and sun all this time.