Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Many in the anti-Mormon community have criticized the fact that the plates upon which the Book of Mormon were taken (translated), and that they were “taken”, is very convenient” for the Mormons, because they are not available for comparison, review, inspection, etc. But in reality it is not ‘very inconvenient” at all, but “very necessary”. I have given much thought to what arguments would be made if we did have the “plates”. Before listing any it is only (FAIR©) to note that we do not have (no one has) the “Stone Tablets” upon which were engraved by the “Hand of God” the Ten Commandments. Because the OT was passed down via “Oral Tradition” we do not have (no one has) any original manuscripts. Beyond the OT, there are missing manuscripts of the NT as well. Also the “famous” or “infamous” missing books…http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/lost-books?lang=eng&letter=lNote: Not all missing to all versions, but missing, or a more descriptive term may be “excluded”. Many scriptural books are alleged too have been written centuries after the advent of Christ. But returning to the main theme, what if we had the “plates of gold or brass”?This is my list; maybe some of you could add? In addition I would also like a list from those representing other organizations or interests to list what they would need to be satisfied. Including for example IRR©, President Rob Bowman or others.My list…No one can read this language it is made up!They have them but will not everyone see them…this already happens with many religious artifacts that are in the possession of others; made by those not allowed to see them.They have not been carbon dated.They have been carbon dated and scientists cannot agree.Mormons don’t have Scholars or Scientists, BYU only teaches Pseudoscience. This one may have merit? I don’t care what anyone says; I have not seen them!OK the comments made there on the plates are correct according to the inscription, but there is no evidence beyond written that Nephites and Laminites ever existed. The plates are plagiarized from the Bible.“A Bible, a Bible, we have got a Bible and there can be no other Bible”.There theology does not match orthodoxy and therefore it is false.It does no agree with our “Creeds”!They store them behind protective glass, how do we know what it is? BTW, the Church is a con has the money to produce something and do this!No God would require obedience for salvation.I will add others as additional posts…My list for why they are not available…”all of the above”.Be serious and have fun.
Saints Alive Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Perhaps not having the plates prevents multiple translations. Other denominations could easily "translate" the BOM to support the trinity, or other creedal doctrine.
thesometimesaint Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 It is worse for the Christian critics as there is not one book in the entire Bible that is original. Further in the books of the Bible that we do have every word has been edited and reedited multiple times.
cinepro Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) It's very possible the situation would mirror the Book of Abraham and the papyri.Initially, the plates would be undecipherable, so most LDS would assume the Book of Mormon was 1:1 translation, and that's what the Church would teach in lesson manuals. Then, over time, to the degree that the language on the plates could be deciphered, the text of the Book of Mormon would match about as closely as the text from the Book of Abraham matches the papayri.The apologetic explanations would then fall into the same pattern, with some suggesting we have the wrong (or incomplete) set of plates, and others suggesting the plates were a "catalyst" that allowed Joseph to receive the Book of Mormon history via revelation.More tellingly would be whether any living prophets would use the plates as a source for translation when preparing new editions of the Book of Mormon in other languages. Again, based on the Book of Abraham, I suspect not.The mere existence of the plates probably wouldn't do much to convert anyone. After all, I haven't heard of many people converting to Judaism based on the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls by some uneducated bedouin boys in the 20th century. Edited February 10, 2012 by cinepro
Bob Crockett Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 In my opinion, hypotheticals when dealing with a revealed religion are a complete waste of time and space and counter-productive to an understanding of that revealed religion. What if Moroni didn't really exist? What if the resurrection really didn't occur? What if George Albert Smith was a concealed adulterer? Moreover, in my reading of Christian apologetic literature over the ages, I just don't see hypotheticals used as a legitimate academic exercise. 1
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 10, 2012 Author Posted February 10, 2012 Perhaps not having the plates prevents multiple translations. Other denominations could easily "translate" the BOM to support the trinity, or other creedal doctrine.This is why I think it was necessary to keep them out of the hands of others. I assure you this would be the case.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 10, 2012 Author Posted February 10, 2012 In my opinion, hypotheticals when dealing with a revealed religion are a complete waste of time and space and counter-productive to an understanding of that revealed religion. What if Moroni didn't really exist? What if the resurrection really didn't occur? What if George Albert Smith was a concealed adulterer? Moreover, in my reading of Christian apologetic literature over the ages, I just don't see hypotheticals used as a legitimate academic exercise.Highlighted in RED…a complexly inappropriate comment for this thread.Highlighted BLUE…keep reading.Do not clutter board with what if threads. All you are going to do is start an irresolvable argument.
Recommended Posts