"If" The Bible Was Man-Made What Would It Look Like?

[Craig Paxton]

Please define this so-called "magical thinking" for us.

Magical thinking...IS...drum roll please...thinking magically...or using magic, super natural, god or gods power to explain things we either don't understand or would feel more comfortable assigning to the magical thinking.

[altersteve]

Well at least we partially agree. But how is it then that Joseph's personal letters to his wife became scripture? Did God also inspire Joseph's personal correspondence? And maybe God also inspired Joseph's diary enties too...cuz they too somehow were elevated to the status of scripture. Or maybe...just maybe Joseph was a very gifted man with the ability to string inspirring words together insuch a manner as to inspire other human beings...but that is just me thinking silly thoughts...naw that could have never been the case...a mere man could never string inspiring words together all on his own...now that IS just plain silly.

Why couldn't Joseph have been stringing words together "all on his own" while still being inspired to do it? Are they mutually exclusive to you?

[altersteve]

Magical thinking...IS...drum roll please...thinking magically...or using magic, super natural, god or gods power to explain things we either don't understand or would feel more comfortable assigning to the magical thinking.

Well I see that as just being lazy, and that's certainly not how I see the world.

[Freedom]

Well at least we partially agree. But how is it then that Joseph's personal letters to his wife became scripture? Did God also inspire Joseph's personal correspondence? And maybe God also inspired Joseph's diary enties too...cuz they too somehow were elevated to the status of scripture. Or maybe...just maybe Joseph was a very gifted man with the ability to string inspirring words together insuch a manner as to inspire other human beings...but that is just me thinking silly thoughts...naw that could have never been the case...a mere man could never string inspiring words together all on his own...now that IS just plain silly.

There are portions of our current bible that are revelations and intended to be divinely given, there are other portions that are inspired but not necessarily intended as scripture. I think that our general conference talks are of similar stature to many of the records of the bible. They are inspired and relate to real needs and real events, but they are not considered canonized scripture. Many of the writings of Paul were never intended to represent the official position of the church; he even states as much. The Book of Mormon is unique in that it went through a careful editing process over several years by prophets who were commanded to perform the work. There is no such evidence that the bible went through this prophetic scrutiny.

So the bible is a book that has some revelations, similar to the D&C, and other material that is more like the random letters of Joseph Smith or other church leaders.

[thesometimesaint]

Craig Paxton:

Any number of poets and authors string together words, and I have no problem with God inspiring them to write the words. Most of the time I just get a stupor of thought, but occasionally I believe they are inspired.

All of scripture is just letters, or stories, to individuals or small groups telling them what someones thoughts, and feelings are. What makes them Scripture is when they become authoritative, or accepted by authority. We claim the authority to determine what we believe as a church.

[zerinus]

Well at least we partially agree. But how is it then that Joseph's personal letters to his wife became scripture?

Not sure which "letters" you were referring to; but if Paul's personal letters to Timothy could become scripture, not sure why Joseph's couldn't.

Did God also inspire Joseph's personal correspondence? And maybe God also inspired Joseph's diary enties too...cuz they too somehow were elevated to the status of scripture.

What is a difference between a prophecy written in a diary, and one written elsewhere? How did you conclude that a prophecy was not a prophecy if written in a diary? Has God forbidden prophecies to be written in diaries?

[Gervin]

What you are ignoring is that 99% of pots and pans have no indicators on them. There are precious view and unique items that have writings but they are not related to the type of items found in Central America. In Central America, as in all other places in the world, 99% of what is found has no inscriptions on them.

Actually, the style of pottery itself can be a good indicator of origin - place, culture and time. However, I don't understand your point.

The items that do have inscriptions cannot be translated so we have no idea what they say.

Really?

http://en.wikipedia....:Sacul_vase.jpg

You are suggesting that we should find Nephite writings.

I've suggested no such thing. All I've said is that you must support your assumption about where Book of Mormon events took place - and that support will / or will not include written (or hieroglyphic) evidence.

If we are to find a written record of the Nephites, we should find a written record of others. La Venta and other cites dispel your argument.

I'm not sure what argument you believe is dispelled. In what way do you consider the stele, sculptural, altars, and monuments of La Venta as part of your claim of "no record?"

Edited June 29, 2012 by Gervin

[thesometimesaint]

John Ping Pong:

I don't have a problem with myth per say. Myth simply tells a story. IE; King Arthur probably was a real live human being, and the first king of England. However not all the stories(myths) that have become associated with him are historically correct.

[Mudcat]

Every single word written in the Bible originated first in the mind of some human being. Whether that person imagined voices in their head or merely created them from his/her own thoughts, it was a mortal being that put quill to parchment.

Craig,

Bold mine. You state this like it were a simple fact. In truth, it is just your opinion. You can not corroborate this statement as a fact.

The need to assign the source of the words in the Bible to some god figure undermines the talents of the original human who crated those words….irrespective of where they believed those words originated from….they did in fact being within the confines of their own minds.

Apparently those who penned the words or began an oration of them that would pass beyond their lives don't seem to feel the same way you feel on the matter. These people attributed what they were saying to God, not to undermine themselves, but rather to give the credit where it was actually due.

Interesting that the religious scripture of non-Judeo-Christian ancient civilizations are plainly seen for what they clearly are…the works of man. Why would this be? Could it be that because we do not believe in their gods due to our Judeo-Christian blinders that we discount the non-Judeo-Christian writers and assign their very human work to mere fictional ranting of delusional men who also claimed inspiration from voices they heard in their heads as well?

I think there are mixed views amongst Christians on the religious writings of other cultures. Some might say they are completely faulty and attribute such things to the creation of man, the work of the adversary and so forth. Others might see the prevenient work of God in the areas in which such writings, teachings, ethical codes, etc. are consistent with those inspired throughout Scripture by the Holy Spirit. I don't think the issue is as cut and dried as you make it sound.

But to answer, I don't see that acceptance of the Christian view as some sort of "blinder". Quite the opposite, the Holy Spirit seeks to guide the Christian closer to what is right rather than to steer the believer about blindly. IMO, it is the Christian who holds the advantage above those of other religions like Hinduism, Paganism, etc as well as having advantage over the skeptics. The Holy Spirit is our eyeglasses, so to speak, we have been given a means by God to overcome the myopia that is a part of human nature.

How is it that we can all see the very human origins in ancient pagan writings yet fail to see them in our own Judeo-Christian writings?

Craig, this does seem to myopic here. You don't speak for all, when you say "we can all see". Perhaps no one on the forum is a pagan, but paganism is still practiced in the world.

[thesometimesaint]

Gervin:

The Church takes no position on where the main events described in the BoM took place. Circumstantial evidence points to Mesoamerica, possibly the Olmec.

Since the Nephites adapted Egyptian hieroglyphs in a unique way. Absent a Rosetta Stone I'm not too sure we'd recognize their writing even if we found it.

[Freedom]

Actually, the style of pottery itself can be a good indicator of origin - place, culture and time. However, I don't understand your point.

Ok, so based on the Book of Mormon, provide a description of the place, culture and time and I will find an artifact that matches.

Really?

http://en.wikipedia....:Sacul_vase.jpg

Late Classic Maya 300 years after the Nephites were destroyed? Really?

I've suggested no such thing. All I've said is that you must support your assumption about where Book of Mormon events took place - and that support will / or will not include written (or hieroglyphic) evidence.

There have been numerous articles written on the subject and you are aware of them.

I'm not sure what argument you believe is dispelled. In what way do you consider the stele, sculptural, altars, and monuments of La Venta as part of your claim of "no record?"

There is no written record at this location. There is no indication of what they called themselves. If we don't know what they called themselves, how can it be proven that they were not Nephite? Why are we expected to find evidence of Zerahamla when we cannot find evidence of any location or cultural names?

[wenglund]

A good way to tell whether secularists are discussing in bad faith with religionists is were they to pepper their statements with thought-terminating cliché's like "fantasy" and "magic-thinking."

When this happens, it raises serious doubts about the value of discussing religious matters further with such people.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[GreyHat]

It would contain stuff like this

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***." 1 Samuel 15:3

[GreyHat]

Anyone interested in engaging in apologetics for genocide?

[Gervin]

Ok, so based on the Book of Mormon, provide a description of the place, culture and time and I will find an artifact that matches.

Your premise is that the Book of Mormon describes real people, cultures and events. I don't support your premise, so it's up to you provide the descriptions you list. If you can't, then your premise might be suspect.

Late Classic Maya 300 years after the Nephites were destroyed? Really?

You stated that 99% of pottery [not identified with any Period or Culture] has no inscriptions and, by the way, we don't know what they say when they do have inscriptions. I showed you were wrong. You'll have to explain what you mean by your reference to Classic Maya.

There is no written record at this location. There is no indication of what they called themselves. If we don't know what they called themselves, how can it be proven that they were not Nephite? Why are we expected to find evidence of Zerahamla when we cannot find evidence of any location or cultural names?

You are expected to find evidence because you make the claim that the Book of Mormon peoples, cultures, wars, events, religious practices, migrations, ship construction, temple-building, writings, city-building, etc. took place in Mesoamerica. The archaeological record of La Venta points to culture, architecture, beliefs and other aspects of their life. If you believe these people were Nephite then make that case.

[Verum]

I think someone already mentioned here that the best way to determine "man-made" versus God-inspired writings is to go to God himself and ask. The premise assumes that no person is able to discern whether the texts are from God or man by their own discernment alone.

I actually agree with this, my only hang up though is that I think many people have the same difficulty with discerning the difference between God given answers from prayer versus answeres derived from man's own psyche that they have with discerning between God-inspired writings versus man-made.

[Freedom]

Your premise is that the Book of Mormon describes real people, cultures and events. I don't support your premise, so it's up to you provide the descriptions you list. If you can't, then your premise might be suspect.

I don't intend to regurgitate what has been listed dozens of times by people more qualified then myself. You have access to the material, I do not intend to spoon feed you.

You stated that 99% of pottery [not identified with any Period or Culture] has no inscriptions and, by the way, we don't know what they say when they do have inscriptions. I showed you were wrong. You'll have to explain what you mean by your reference to Classic Maya.

Well, since we are talking about the Nephites, I would have thought that the time frame is assumed. The pot linked to post dates the Nephites by a few hundred years. You cannot prove that Romans drove cars by producing a picture of a Honda on the streets of Rome.

You are expected to find evidence because you make the claim that the Book of Mormon peoples, cultures, wars, events, religious practices, migrations, ship construction, temple-building, writings, city-building, etc. took place in Mesoamerica. The archaeological record of La Venta points to culture, architecture, beliefs and other aspects of their life. If you believe these people were Nephite then make that case.

Quite simple. This location contains all the types of buildings and social structure that is described in the Book of Mormon. Without a written record, however, we can never prove it. You want proof, I am trying to explain to you that the proof does not exist and likely will never exist. We need a written record.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I’m guessing that it would be full of myths, fables and untrue stories. It would weave actual historical events and combine them with myth. It would have claimed histories of individuals who never existed in reality. It would be heavily influence by the myths and stories of surrounding civilizations. Since man made books can’t predict the future with any accuracy, it would be full of false predictions and failed prophecies. It would be full of miraculous stories of miracles, angels and other godly creatures that don’t exist in the real world and can’t be duplicated under controlled circumstances. In other words it would look pretty much like it does right now…

While the Bible, unlike the Book of Mormon, has been shown to included stories about real cities and civilizations that actually left behind evidence that they existed, it is full of fabricated untrue myths and fables…and has every mark of being a man made book written by men to look like it came from a god.

Is this a question or a statement?

[wenglund]

Anyone interested in engaging in apologetics for genocide?

Here is another good example of the kind of statement made in bad faith to religionists.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[GreyHat]

Here is another good example of the kind of statement made in bad faith to religionists.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Attacking motivations to avoid difficult questions...

[GreyHat]

Thread banned...

Silencing critics when possible. Classic apologetics.

[CASteinman]

Attacking motivations to avoid difficult questions...

The motivations behind the questions are not irrelevant. Not the questioner and not to the respondent and not to the audience.

[GreyHat]

I guess you've learned from the example of Joesph smith and the expositor.

[wenglund]

I actually agree with this, my only hang up though is that I think many people have the same difficulty with discerning the difference between God given answers from prayer versus answeres derived from man's own psyche that they have with discerning between God-inspired writings versus man-made.

I agree with you as well. In fact, on several occasions, I have confused the two, myself..

The good news is, prayer, like most any epistemic strategy (secular or religious), while vulnerable to mistakes, confusion, and misuse, particularly among neophytes and the uneducated, these vulnerabilities may be substantially diminished through good practice, growth in understanding and proficiency, as well as through the employment of other, complimentary strategies, like acting on what has been presumably revealed by God to see if it expands the soul and enlightens the spirit.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[GreyHat]

The motivations behind the questions are not irrelevant. Not the questioner and not to the respondent and not to the audience.

I'm sorry the people who are condoning genocide don't get to take the moral high ground