CES Letter 15 17

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, cinepro said:

The human brain is also good at ignoring connections if they don't confirm an existing belief:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/06/23/confirmation-bias/

That's fine if you don't see it.  But I strongly suspect that if such similarities were found between the Book of Mormon and a translation of an ancient Hebrew source, apologists would not say "Please show me useful evidence, the human brain is good in finding connections."  Because they never have in the past.

This is likewise the case for existing prejudices:  Legitimate connections will be studiously ignored if they don't confirm existing prejudices.  It is always an uphill battle for either side, and this is one of the reasons why it takes so many years of seasoning to train scholars to be dispassionate in their consideration of evidence.  It is simply a fact that people (including scientists) will believe a theory even when unsupported by empirical evidence. It doesn't matter whether the theory is pro- or anti-Mormon, or deals with some other realm.  Everyone subsists on the horns of that dilemma.  Solution:  Far more careful analysis and comparison, along with dependence on a critical community of scholars from a variety of backgrounds and points of view.  It is always helpful to have a good mix of people on this board, for example.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mar.4220120505/abstract

[Tacenda]

Maybe it's what this guy has concluded, after extensive analysis.  

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2013/10/the-book-of-mormon-and-the-late-war-direct-literary-dependence/

"In sum, linguistic and narrative elements of the BoM are probably descended, at least in part, from Gilbert Hunt’s pseudo-biblical account of the War of 1812. The relationship between these two literary works is relatively strong, suggesting that the book had quite a memorable impact on Joseph Smith. But Smith did not borrow directly from the LW (at least for the majority of the narrative content) during the process of composing the BoM."

[Stargazer]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Surely you're aware that Joseph Smith Sr. was a teacher, and very well could have had an edition of the Late War somewhere.  

Where?  Did he keep it in his bookcase with the rest of his extensive library?  Dear Tacenda, the only book that most Americans living on the fringes of the wild wood owned, if they owned any at all, was the Bible.  Joseph Sr's brief stint as a teacher does not mean much beyond the fact that the local school needed a teacher and couldn't require any meaningful standard of qualification beyond the ability to read and write.  Education in the backwoods was nothing like you seem to imagine it.

You were born and raised in a highly developed and technologically advanced country where virtually 100% of the population is required by law to attend government-provided or government-approved primary and secondary school from the age of 5 to 18.  This means that they meet together daily in highly organized, regimented and socialized institutions of learning along with hundreds of others in age-normed groups taught by adults who are required to undergo the same 12 or 13 years of primary and secondary education and who then generally follow this up with a four-year baccalaureate and then a season at a teacher college.  Your teachers were certified professionals, who regardless of their actual ability in teaching were required to meet certain minimum standards of education and grade-average.  By the time they are allowed to stand in front of a classroom to mold the minds of young people these teachers have read and studied hundreds of books, taken and passed dozens of tests, and written dozens of essays.  Heck, they probably personally own hundreds of books.

By contrast, teachers in the early 1800s, especially in the backwoods, were chosen from among adults who sometimes could barely read and write themselves, and they taught in barely adequate one-room schoolrooms that were intended for any and all ages who might attend, and who could be spared from the unremitting labor required to raise enough food to survive.  "Teaching young students was not perceived as an end goal for educated people. Adults became teachers without any particular skill except sometimes in the topic they were teaching. The checking of credentials was left to the local school board, who were mainly interested in the efficient use of limited taxes. This started to change with the introduction of two-year normal schools starting in 1823."  

The fact that Joseph Smith Sr was once a teacher cannot be any kind of persuasive argument that he owned any book at all besides a Bible, which we know he did own.  He was also once a shopkeeper, and you might as well speculate that he might have had an abacus somewhere.

 

 

[TheSkepticChristian]

I still see no evidence that Joseph Smith used the Late War. However, the Late War seems to challenge the Hebraism argument

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms

8:21 And the great Sanhedrim honored Isaac with great honor

13:4 he spake unto Decatur, saying

38:39 they were rejoiced with exceeding great joy

1:10-11 therefore they murmured, and their murmurings have been heard

 

 

 

[Stargazer]

The only thing this topic says to me is there are plenty of people who are grasping at straws, looking for any evidence at all that the Book they were taught about in Church is a pious fraud and unworthy of any reverence.  

Meanwhile, the evidence of the Spirit, which is the only sure form of confirmation (or falsification) available to them, is disregarded, or it goes unsought.

It's very sad.  To me, at least.

[VideoGameJunkie]

19 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

The only thing this topic says to me is there are plenty of people who are grasping at straws, looking for any evidence at all that the Book they were taught about in Church is a pious fraud and unworthy of any reverence.  

Meanwhile, the evidence of the Spirit, which is the only sure form of confirmation (or falsification) available to them, is disregarded, or it goes unsought.

It's very sad.  To me, at least.

Amen.

[cinepro]

11 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Chapters 27-28 and Alma 50:33,35, Alma 62:36-37? [Tecumseh]? Give me a break

Cinepro,

I think you need to check your own confirmation bias. It is ridiculous, why would someone plagiarize like that? 

As with many arguments regarding Book of Mormon evidences (especially apologetic ones), it really comes down to probability.  If you can let us know what kind of probability it takes to impress you (1:1,000?  1:10,000? 1:1,000,000?) and then estimate the probability of those phrases from the Book of Mormon appearing in a book written 10 years before the Book of Mormon was published, that would help me understand what we're dealing with here.

And for comparison's sake, we can also discuss the probability of the "NHM" find.  Which is more likely?

[consiglieri]

20 hours ago, cinepro said:

The witnesses are only one kind of "evidence" about how the translation was done.  The actual words and phrases in the Book of Mormon are also a kind of evidence as to whether or not there were other sources used.   The strength of that evidence (and its implications) can be argued and discussed.  But to say that it doesn't exist is a bit of a stretch.

Especially when you take into account the fact that, regardless of what the witnesses say, it is obvious Joseph Smith used at least one book in the translation of the Book of Mormon--the King James Bible.

[consiglieri]

11 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Chapters 27-28 and Alma 50:33,35, Alma 62:36-37? [Tecumseh]? Give me a break

Cinepro,

I think you need to check your own confirmation bias. It is ridiculous, why would someone plagiarize like that? 

It is a good question.

But we already know that Joseph "plagiarized" the King James Bible all over the place, including many instances from 2nd Isaiah and the New Testament; texts that would not have been available to Lehi and Company.

Because we already know of this "plagiarism" by Joseph, it renders somewhat moot the question of "why would someone plagiarize like that?"

[consiglieri]

20 hours ago, cinepro said:

It probably depends on how you judge the evidence.  I don't know how much analysis has been done, but frankly it's hard for me to read much of this book and not think there's some sort of connection.

Just read the first page from your link, Cinepro.

It is hard to dispute that sounds incredibly Book-of-Mormony.

[consiglieri]

10 hours ago, Stargazer said:

The only thing this topic says to me is there are plenty of people who are grasping at straws, looking for any evidence at all that the Book they were taught about in Church is a pious fraud and unworthy of any reverence.  

Meanwhile, the evidence of the Spirit, which is the only sure form of confirmation (or falsification) available to them, is disregarded, or it goes unsought.

It's very sad.  To me, at least.

What is a man

If the chief good and market of his time

Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.

Sure He that made us with such large discourse,

Looking before and after, gave us not

That capability and godlike reason

To fust in us unused.

[bdouglas]

2 hours ago, consiglieri said:

What is a man

If the chief good and market of his time

Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.

Sure He that made us with such large discourse,

Looking before and after, gave us not

That capability and godlike reason

To fust in us unused.

Very appropriate that you would quote Hamlet in this regard. How about this Hamel soliloquy:

Quote

Now might I do it pat. Now he is a-praying.

And now I’ll do ’t. And so he goes to heaven.

And so am I revenged.—That would be scanned.

"That would be scanned." Hamlet was forever thinking and thinking, always thinking, to the point he could never get anything done.

There are people who think too much about BOM, who obsess over inconsistencies, problems — and so spend their lives, caught between two opinions, hung up at a fork in the road. "Should I submit my resignation? Or should I stick with it?"

Or, like Elijah says, "Why halt you between two opinions?”

Hamlet ends tragically. It is a tragedy. I think it might not be a stretch to say that people who spend their whole lives, or a good part of their lives, hung up on the faults of church leaders, inconsistencies, problems in the BOM — I think that is a tragedy also. It is wasting the days of their probation.

There is the passage in the BOM where Mormon is worried about his weakness is writing i.e. he is worried about faults in the book he is producing. He is worried the gentiles will mock this book. And what does the Lord say to him?

“My grace is sufficient for the meek.”

I’ve been reading the BOM for 30 years. I am aware of some of the problems. But still I try not to get hung up on these problems, miss the forrest for the trees.

“My grace is sufficient for the meek."

Edited December 26, 2015 by bdouglas

[Robert F. Smith]

14 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

I still see no evidence that Joseph Smith used the Late War. However, the Late War seems to challenge the Hebraism argument

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms

8:21 And the great Sanhedrim honored Isaac with great honor

13:4 he spake unto Decatur, saying

38:39 they were rejoiced with exceeding great joy

1:10-11 therefore they murmured, and their murmurings have been heard

The only Hebraisms worth mentioning are those which do not appear in any contemporary source (KJV Bible, Geneva Bible, Book of Common Prayer, etc.), or are completely opaque to the ordinary reader.  Thus, in no sense does the Late War challenge the Hebraism argument.
 

Moreover, most diagnostic Hebraisms are also good Egyptianisms, so that one should be far more concerned with Egyptianisms in a source (Book of Mormon, Brass Plates of Laban) which was engraved in ancient Egyptian.  Indeed, there are plenty of Egyptianisms in the Book of Mormon which do not appear in Hebrew.

[TheSkepticChristian]

5 hours ago, cinepro said:

As with many arguments regarding Book of Mormon evidences (especially apologetic ones), it really comes down to probability.  If you can let us know what kind of probability it takes to impress you (1:1,000?  1:10,000? 1:1,000,000?) and then estimate the probability of those phrases from the Book of Mormon appearing in a book written 10 years before the Book of Mormon was published, that would help me understand what we're dealing with here.

And for comparison's sake, we can also discuss the probability of the "NHM" find.  Which is more likely?

Is there a useful pattern that we can measure? I saw nothing more than text manipulation. If you find big unique phrases or entire sentences in both books, that will be good enough. 

You can say that Joseph Smith read the Late war, and that style of the Book influenced Joseph Smith (interesting possibility), but there is simply no evidence of direct plagiarism. There is no evidence that Joseph Smith used the Late war when translating (or writing) the book of Mormon. 

 

Edited December 26, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[TheSkepticChristian]

4 hours ago, consiglieri said:

It is a good question.

But we already know that Joseph "plagiarized" the King James Bible all over the place, including many instances from 2nd Isaiah and the New Testament; texts that would not have been available to Lehi and Company.

Because we already know of this "plagiarism" by Joseph, it renders somewhat moot the question of "why would someone plagiarize like that?"

Why would someone plagiarize some words, style, and small phrases? It doesn't make sense. 

Quote

Sun-god (father of Mithras) to pray saying

[F]irst beginning of my beginning, ...spirit of spirit, the first spirit in me, ...now if it be your will, ...give me over to immortal birth and, following that, to my underlying nature, so that, after the present need which is pressing me exceedingly, I may gaze upon the immortal beginning with the immortal spirit, ...that I may be born again in thought."

http://infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/gospel_john.html#12

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMRuUynC9i4

[cinepro]

6 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Is there a useful pattern that we can measure? I saw nothing more than text manipulation. If you find big unique phrases or entire sentences in both books, that will be good enough. 

You can say that Joseph Smith read the Late war, and that style of the Book influenced Joseph Smith (interesting possibility), but there is simply no evidence of direct plagiarism. There is no evidence that Joseph Smith used the Late war when translating (or writing) the book of Mormon. 

 

Here's another way to look at it:

Suppose The Late War had been published in 1840 (10 years after the publication of The Book of Mormon) instead of 1816.  Now go and read the first page again:

The Late War

Could you find evidence in "The Late War" that the author had probably read "The Book of Mormon" and borrowed words, phrases and events from it?  I'll bet that would be a pretty easy argument for Book of Mormon scholars to make.  I suspect it's only because The Late War was published before The Book of Mormon that it becomes harder to see.

Edited December 27, 2015 by cinepro

[TheSkepticChristian]

3 hours ago, cinepro said:

Here's another way to look at it:

You can only say that Joseph Smith learned the Late War's King James Version style, but nothing more. There is no evidence of direct plagiarism. 

You said, "Now go and read the first page again" You too 

1. Now it came to pass, in the one thousand eight hundred and twelfth year of the christian era, and in the thirty and sixth year after the people of the provinces of Columbia had declared themselves a free and independent nation;

Ezekiel 1:1:  Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month

Part VII, Chapter 76: The Texans had declared themselves a free and independent nation

4. And the name of the city where the people were gathered together was called after the name of the chief captain of the land of Columbia, whose fame extendeth to the uttermost parts of the earth; albeit, he had slept with his fathers.

Jeremiah 26:9: and this city shall be ... And all the people were gathered together against Jeremias in the house of the Lord

Exposition on Psalm 127: He slept...it has reached unto the uttermost parts of the earth. 

 

Edited December 27, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[cinepro]

10 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

You can only say that Joseph Smith learned the Late War's King James Version style, but nothing more. There is no evidence of direct plagiarism. 

You said, "Now go and read the first page again" You too 

1. Now it came to pass, in the one thousand eight hundred and twelfth year of the christian era, and in the thirty and sixth year after the people of the provinces of Columbia had declared themselves a free and independent nation;

Ezekiel 1:1:  Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month

Part VII, Chapter 76: The Texans had declared themselves a free and independent nation

4. And the name of the city where the people were gathered together was called after the name of the chief captain of the land of Columbia, whose fame extendeth to the uttermost parts of the earth; albeit, he had slept with his fathers.

Jeremiah 26:9: and this city shall be ... And all the people were gathered together against Jeremias in the house of the Lord

Exposition on Psalm 127: He slept...it has reached unto the uttermost parts of the earth. 

 

Remember, in order to test the hypothesis, you need to look for the best correlations between the books, not the weakest ones...

So keep looking.  Find the best correlations, figure out what the probability is, and let us know if that meets your standard for a likely connection.

[TheSkepticChristian]

4 hours ago, cinepro said:

Remember, in order to test the hypothesis, you need to look for the best correlations between the books, not the weakest ones...

So keep looking.  Find the best correlations, figure out what the probability is, and let us know if that meets your standard for a likely connection.

Why? You quote. You present the evidence. Even if Joseph Smith read the Late War, even if he used the same style of the Late War (KJV english), that wouldn't do anything to challenge the Book of Mormon.  The same writing style is not plagiarism. I used a plagiarism detector, I compared the Late War's first page to the First Book of Nephi, it found nothing. 

wikipedia says, "The Late War is an account of the War of 1812 written in the style of the King James Bible." 

There are better arguments against BofM, the Late War is simply a very bad one. 

Edited December 27, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[omni]

I'm convinced there is literally no evidence that could disprove the BoM.  Every type of evidence that would typically be used to discount any other work is ignored or assigned a creative workaround.  Anachronisms, plagiarisms, text changes, conflicts with modern science, and contemporary influences have all been shown to exist within the BoM, yet are summarily dismissed.

The BoM could mention the Nephite's usage of steam powered trains and a word-for-word copy of an 1825 local preacher's sermon and it would mean nothing.  The train usage could be argued as merely JS's attempt of using a modern word to describe an ancient machine or even better, the catch all, "how do we know they didn't exist, archeologists have barely touched Central America?"  

To explain the plagiarism, one would need to simply ask, "why couldn't have God inspired the preacher with the same sermon as he did an ancient Nephite prophet?"

 

[Stargazer]

On 12/26/2015 at 9:35 AM, consiglieri said:

It is a good question.

But we already know that Joseph "plagiarized" the King James Bible all over the place, including many instances from 2nd Isaiah and the New Testament; texts that would not have been available to Lehi and Company.

Because we already know of this "plagiarism" by Joseph, it renders somewhat moot the question of "why would someone plagiarize like that?"

Joseph isn't plagiarizing a thing.  He translates (or is given the translation), and the passages in question appear in the source document.  Joseph is only plagiarizing if you assume from that the Book of Mormon was written by Joseph out of his own imagination.  Or Solomon Spaulding or whoever you choose to believe the source is.

But is it plagiarizing to openly quote a work?  When Nephi reproduces Isaiah, he makes clear that what he's writing is from Isaiah, and cites the source as the Brass Plates.  Now, you might think that he should have just referred to Isaiah by chapter and verse so we could look it up, but there's two problems with that approach.  First is that I don't think the Book of Isaiah was subdivided into chapters and verses at the time of Nephi.  Next is that the Book of Isaiah is not universally available -- because printing hadn't yet been invented.  They had one copy of the Brass Plates.  

In the other places where Jesus visits the Nephites and some of his words from the New Testament appear, it is Jesus quoting himself -- and I do believe that it permitted to quote one's own words.  Again, it is only plagiarism if, first of all, the Book of Mormon is the work of Joseph Smith, AND second, he didn't properly attribute what he quoted.

You bias is showing.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 12/26/2015 at 10:52 PM, TheSkepticChristian said:

 

Quote

 

near Moravian Town ... And it came to pass ... the army ... were under ... a chief warrior, whom they called Tecumseh [...] smote their chief warrior [Tecumseh], and slew him ... he fell to the earth.

people of Morianton ... And it came to pass ... the army ... was led by a man whose name was Teancum [...] they did pursue Teancum, and slew him ... he was dead, and had gone the way of all the earth.

 

Chapters 27-28 and Alma 50:33,35, Alma 62:36-37? [Tecumseh]? Give me a break

Cinepro,

I think you need to check your own confirmation bias. It is ridiculous, why would someone plagiarize like that? 

Actually, Tecumseh and his brother are excellent parallels with Jared and his brother.

[Stargazer]

14 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Actually, Tecumseh and his brother are excellent parallels with Jared and his brother.

And Moses and Aaron his brother.

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Joseph isn't plagiarizing a thing.

On the subject of 'plagiarism' in the Book of Mormon, I am always reminded of the following experience, which I shared on this forum nearly three years ago:

'About four years ago, one of my Young Men was preparing to receive his patriarchal blessing, and he asked me to fast with him on the day. Later that morning, he came down sick with the flu and then had trouble at school, and he felt like everything was going wrong. In despair, he sent me a text message. Before responding, I prayed and asked that I'd know exactly what this boy needed to hear to help buoy him up for the experience that was to come that evening. Then I tapped out a very long (several screens in length) message in reply. At the home of the patriarch that evening, I sat and listened to the patriarch speak what I then thought were the exact words of counsel thatI had many hours earlier written. When I checked later, I was wrong, however; they were the exact same words except for one, and there the patriarch had used a synonym.

'What's the point? Now, when I read critiques of the Book of Mormon that argue that Joseph Smith merely plagiarised passages from the Bible, putting, for example, the words of Paul into the mouth of Mormon, this point just slides right past me. I know from personal experience that God can -- and does! -- give close to the exact same words to different people. I've lived that reality'.

[Rajah Manchou]

On 12/26/2015 at 9:47 PM, Stargazer said:

The only support that exists that this book might have found its way into any school for children of any kind, let alone specifically for New York's, is in the author's preface where he, himself, recommends his book for schools.  This followed up by two endorsements, one by a guy named Mitchell of uncertain status..

Samuel Mitchill is not of uncertain status. He was one of the leading intellectuals in America at the time. Joseph Smith knew of him and had sent Martin Harris to meet him and show him characters supposedly copied from the plates. Mitchill met Harris and (according to Harris) claimed the Book of Mormon characters resembled those of an extinct nation, which he named. 

"He [Professor Charles Anthon] replied 'I cannot read a sealed book' I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned what Professor Anthony had said respecting both the characters and the translation." [PJS 1:285-286 and HC 1:20]

Edited December 28, 2015 by Rajah Manchou