Joseph Smith's intelligence

[InCognitus]

30 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

 Fawn Brodie wrote that it "may never be proved that Joseph saw View of the Hebrews before writing the Book of Mormon, but the striking parallelisms between the two books hardly leave a case for mere coincidence.

That argument really only works if you don't read View of the Hebrews and assume that Fawn Brodie's assertion is correct.  The book has been republished and is available for anyone to read (my copy is published by Religious Studies Center Brigham Young University of all places).  The "parallelisms" are rather general, and don't really explain the Book of Mormon's origin at all. 

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, pogi said:

What motivation would Oliver Cowdery have to take part in such a fraud to build up Joseph Smith as a prophet and Seer?

The BoM doesn't have to be a fraud at all, I think they got different ideas from all around and even could have been prompted. It can be true if it leads someone to Christ. This because of all of the new information out there that has come to light. I believe that Oliver helped Joseph put it all down in words. But something that bothers is them trying to sell the copyright.

But so I don't derail, I think Joseph got help by others to make the BoM coherent, if it's true that he can't write this book. He does have a good memory and I believe knew his Bible well. Therefore he was able to talk and the transcribers listened. 

Edited December 6, 2019 by Tacenda

[pogi]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

The BoM doesn't have to be a fraud at all, I think they got different ideas from all around and even could have been prompted. It can be true if it leads someone to Christ. This because of all of the new information out there that has come to light. I believe that Oliver helped Joseph put it all down in words. But something that bothers is them trying to sell the copyright.

That is not at all what the Book claims to be though - a compilation of contemporary ideas from "all around".  If Joseph and Oliver actually authored the book, how would that not be fraudulent given their claims? 

[InCognitus]

12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

But something that bothers is them trying to sell the copyright.

What part of that is bothersome?

[Tacenda]

14 minutes ago, pogi said:

That is not at all what the Book claims to be though - a compilation of contemporary ideas from "all around".  If Joseph and Oliver actually authored the book, how would that not be fraudulent given their claims? 

IMO, this will one day be the case, and is used by God as a vehicle. But back to Duncan's post. I do believe JS was very intelligent, his his father was a school teacher, which means, I'm sure, that he also taught Joseph a great deal.

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

his father was a school teacher, which means, I'm sure, that he also taught Joseph a great deal.

You shouldn't assume that someone being a school teacher means their kids are well educated.  What evidence do you have that he chose to teach his kids "a great deal" or given the standard of school teacher at the time, he had a great deal to offer.

Quote

At the time, teachers were not well respected or well paid. Schoolmasters (nearly all teachers and pupils in the system were men) were hard to come by and usually poorly educated themselves. Those who did have an education or teaching experience often ditched their careers early on for more lucrative professions until women took over the profession in the 1840s. Women were much less likely to leave their teaching jobs, as there were few other professional options for them.

https://www.history.com/news/in-early-1800s-american-classrooms-students-governed-themselves

[pogi]

39 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, this will one day be the case...

Not sure what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

[Ahab]

28 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, this will one day be the case, and is used by God as a vehicle. But back to Duncan's post. I do believe JS was very intelligent, his his father was a school teacher, which means, I'm sure, that he also taught Joseph a great deal.

A discussion about the difference between knowledge and intelligence might be helpful here. 

Knowledge is an awareness of something, and I'm sure Joseph's father tried to teach and help Joseph become aware of a lot of things that he (his father) was aware of.  

Intelligence involves being aware of something (knowing something) and having some good sense of how to use that knowledge. In D&C 93 Joseph received a revelation from the Lord to help him become aware that intelligence is light and truth and that the glory of God is intelligence.  

So imagine Joseph being taught by his father about what his father knew but with Joseph not being very intelligent, with not very much good sense of how to use that knowledge.  Not being able to determine if what his father taught him was true, or not being able to determine what to do with that knowledge even if it was true.  Surely you've seen situations where someone has tried to teach somebody something but the person being taught has trouble understanding what he or she is being taught.  They just don't seem to get it, even after repeated attempts to try to teach them what that person, the so-called teacher, is trying to teach them.

So Joseph's level of intelligence doesn't really have very much to do with what his father may have tried to each him.  Some people aren't intelligent enough, or are not very receptive to receiving more intelligence, even if you try to teach them something 100 times.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

But something that bothers is them trying to sell the copyright.

Have you read the FairMormon page on this?

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Attempt_to_sell_copyright

"[Hiram] Page wrote that the revelation Joseph Smith received conditioned success upon whether those individuals in Canada capable of buying the Book of Mormon copyright would have their hearts softened."

Sounds like the Lord gave permission on condition that those buying the copyright were converted, or at least received a testimony of the Book of Mormon.  The money received was to be used to pay off debts associated with publishing the book.

Edited December 6, 2019 by ksfisher

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

That is not at all what the Book claims to be though - a compilation of contemporary ideas from "all around".  If Joseph and Oliver actually authored the book, how would that not be fraudulent given their claims? 

It's all in how you look at it.

28 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Have you read the FairMormon page on this?

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Attempt_to_sell_copyright

"[Hiram] Page wrote that the revelation Joseph Smith received conditioned success upon whether those individuals in Canada capable of buying the Book of Mormon copyright would have their hearts softened."

Sounds like the Lord gave permission on condition that those buying the copyright were converted, or at least received a testimony of the Book of Mormon.  The money received was to be used to pay off debts associated with publishing the book.

Yes I have. But these answers don't make sense to me. But on to the topic at hand.

46 minutes ago, pogi said:

Not sure what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

I believe it will come out that the BoM isn't fully literal. Just a belief.

51 minutes ago, Calm said:

You shouldn't assume that someone being a school teacher means their kids are well educated.  What evidence do you have that he chose to teach his kids "a great deal" or given the standard of school teacher at the time, he had a great deal to offer.

https://www.history.com/news/in-early-1800s-american-classrooms-students-governed-themselves

Well, I happen to believe that he was able to gain a lot from his father and his upbringing. And helping him write the BoM are his roots....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith#CITEREFBrooke1994 "Smith's teachings were rooted in dispensational restorationism."

Meaning he was well versed in the Bible, IMO.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Tacenda

[InCognitus]

15 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Have you read the FairMormon page on this?

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Attempt_to_sell_copyright

"[Hiram] Page wrote that the revelation Joseph Smith received conditioned success upon whether those individuals in Canada capable of buying the Book of Mormon copyright would have their hearts softened."

Sounds like the Lord gave permission on condition that those buying the copyright were converted, or at least received a testimony of the Book of Mormon.  The money received was to be used to pay off debts associated with publishing the book.

The full revelation is available in the Joseph Smith Papers here:  https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelation-circa-early-1830/2

The revelation doesn't read the same way that David Whitmer recalled it to have been some 58 years later in his Address to All Believers in Christ, and fits more with the accounts from other eyewitnesses.  .

[pogi]

4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It's all in how you look at it.

Ok, help me see. 

[Tacenda]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

Ok, help me see. 

It has now come to light that JS didn't use the plates but used the seerstone. Many don't believe he read off of the stone word by word. But many believe things came to his mind. So I believe Joseph picked up on a lot of what was being taught around him. We get so much theology from him that he first heard or was taught, elsewhere. His grandfather and father also received visions. I believe he was destined to prophecy with all that he grew up with and what was surrounding him. Many in his day and age, believed they were in the last days, and I believe this caused the religious to try and figure out what God wanted from them, and many received visions, not just Joseph. In Joseph's day, many became amazing poets & writers, this was their entertainment. They didn't have the kinds of distractions we have. 

[pogi]

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It has now come to light that JS didn't use the plates but used the seerstone. Many don't believe he read off of the stone word by word. But many believe things came to his mind. So I believe Joseph picked up on a lot of what was being taught around him. We get so much theology from him that he first heard or was taught, elsewhere. His grandfather and father also received visions. I believe he was destined to prophecy with all that he grew up with and what was surrounding him. Many in his day and age, believed they were in the last days, and I believe this caused the religious to try and figure out what God wanted from them, and many received visions, not just Joseph. In Joseph's day, many became amazing poets & writers, this was their entertainment. They didn't have the kinds of distractions we have. 

It doesn't matter how he claims to have translated it.  His claim is that it is a translation of an ancient record and NOT a collection of contemporary ideas.  To claim otherwise is to call him a fraud. 

Quote

According to the Prophet Joseph Smith, “the title-page of the Book of Mormon is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated, the language of the whole running the same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that said title page is not by any means a modern composition, either of mine or of any other man who has lived or does live in this generation”

So that pretty much shoots your idea down.

Have you read the title page?  If so, surely you see that if the book is indeed a collection of contemporary ideas, then it is not what it claims to be and is therefore fraudulent.  To say that Joseph got the idea from Oliver Cowdery that the Native Americans are of Hebrew origin and that Joseph made up a story around that concept, is not reconcilable with the title page and his claim.  

Edited December 6, 2019 by pogi

[theplains]

5 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Intelligence and/or any education aside, Joseph had qualities and other talents to enhance.  Charisma is one.

From what is recorded in church history, Joseph Smith seemed to lack faith in the Bible in the 
context of hearing different teachings of the time (1:12-13).

Then he placed more importance on wanting to find out which church to join instead of wanting to 
know if the Bible was true (1:18).

Despite his claims to have seen Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, we went back to his foolish
and sinful behaviour.

"I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently 
fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human 
nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God."

He seems to think that none of these offensive acts in the sight of God should make him appear
guilty of any great or malignant sins (1:28).

He makes a statement later on but doesn't clarify why being jovial is not appropriate for a man
of God.

"But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent 
with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been."

But Jesus spent time with people and did things to the point where he was criticised (Mark 2:15-
17, Luke 7:34).

Thanks,
Jim

[Tacenda]

28 minutes ago, pogi said:

It doesn't matter how he claims to have translated it.  His claim is that it is a translation of an ancient record and NOT a collection of contemporary ideas.  To claim otherwise is to call him a fraud. 

So that pretty much shoots your idea down.

Have you read the title page?  If so, surely you see that if the book is indeed a collection of contemporary ideas, then it is not what it claims to be and is therefore fraudulent.  To say that Joseph got the idea from Oliver Cowdery that the Native Americans are of Hebrew origin and that Joseph made up a story around that concept, is not reconcilable with the title page and his claim.  

Well that was put in at a later time. The title page is somewhat different in the original BoM. https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/7

[pogi]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Well that was put in at a later time. The title page is somewhat different in the original BoM. https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/7

I’m not sure how this justifies and reconciles anything in your mind.

[Ahab]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Well that was put in at a later time. The title page is somewhat different in the original BoM. https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/7

If you're talking about his name appearing as the "author" of the book that was because he was the one who wrote it in English, or had his scribes do it, but what he and they wrote was a translation of ancient records that were written in other languages.  For some reason the publisher wanted someone to identify himself as the "author" and Joseph used his own name since he was the who wrote it or had his scribes do he writing while he dictated.  I suppose he could have told the publisher that the author was "God" but not even the people who translate the Bible do that.

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

I’m not sure how this justifies and reconciles anything in your mind.

I thought we were free to have our own thoughts. I've never been able to get a spiritual confirmation of it being an historical account, so please let's move on, so that Duncan's OP isn't derailed once again by the likes of me!

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

If you're talking about his name appearing as the "author" of the book that was because he was the one who wrote it in English, or had his scribes do it, but what he and they wrote was a translation of ancient records that were written in other languages.  For some reason the publisher wanted someone to identify himself as the "author" and Joseph used his own name since he was the who wrote it or had his scribes do he writing while he dictated.  I suppose he could have told the publisher that the author was "God" but not even the people who translate the Bible do that.

That's not what I was talking about.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Tacenda

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I thought we were free to have our own thoughts. I've never been able to get a spiritual confirmation of it being an historical account, so please let's move on, so that Duncan's OP isn't derailed once again by the likes of me!

That’s fine.  And you are free to have your own thoughts, but when you make assertions be prepared to defend them, or at least try to explain them.

Edited December 7, 2019 by pogi

[Robert F. Smith]

14 hours ago, cinepro said:

Just because no person (or no other person) has done something doesn't mean no person could do something.

Correct, but not applicable when placed in real world circumstances of evaluating any book, such as the Bible, or the Book of Mormon.  Experts evaluate documents every day to determine their authenticity.  They are called "document examiners" and they use the full panoply of science to evaluate documents for courts, scholars, etc.  Document examiners brought down the machinations of Mark Hofmann, as you may recall.  Furthermore, your notion here that someone can do virtually anything is itself absurd.  Humans do have limits to their capacities.

Quote

And I'm not sure why you think the contents of the book "belie any attempt to explain it by natural means."  There have been tons of different theories presented over the years; I'm shocked you haven't heard of them.  Not only have there been numerous attempts to explain it by natural means, even if there were no attempts to explain it otherwise, that does not lend credence to any supernatural theories.

And of course, this ignores the fact that the contents of the book also "belie" any success at explaining the contents of the book by supernatural means too.  The supernatural theories leave just as many gaps and questions as the natural ones do.  Heck, even the most simple question of "tight" or "loose" translation can't be answered; both are contradicted by the "contents of the book."

You express shock that I am unfamiliar with the "tons of different theories" of BofM origins, and you seem transfixed especially by the "supernatural theories."  I can assure you that I have heard all the theories.

I am specifying "natural means" precisely because my discussion relies only on the accepted canons of science and reason.  I consider it schizoid for anyone to simultaneously opt for nature and supernature.  That merely muddies the waters and makes rational inquiry meaningless.  Setting aside for the moment the fact that LDS theology rejects the supernatural anyhow.

Quote

As for "manifold real word connections in the ancient New World", I would argue that any book of sufficient length made with the style and setting of the Book of Mormon could reveal tons of connections to an ancient setting, with the number of connections only limited by the education, creativity and perseverance of those who were dedicated to finding those connections.  Book of Mormon studies would fit comfortably with UFO research, Bigfoot taxonomy, and ghost hunting.  All real, valid endeavors pursued by smart, dedicated people that have produced mountains of "evidences."  I can't "explain away" all of their evidence, and I don't necessarily have fully formed counter-theories at the ready, but yet I don't feel logically compelled to believe in UFOs, bigfoot or ghosts.  I just accept that their evidences haven't met the burden of proof yet, and withhold belief until that day comes.

You forgot to throw in the flat Earth and kitchen sink for good measure.  I don't believe in traditional ghosts, sasquatches, or starships from other systems, cinepro.  They make for some fun in a sci-fi context, but I agree that they are not part of serious real world scientific inquiry.  However, I am not speaking to any of that anyhow.  So I am not sure why you think that has anything to do with standard scientific inquiry by non-LDS scientists worldwide for a couple of centuries now, because I am supposing that you are not in denial about the fundamental conclusions reached by that larger community of scientists on  a host of basic questions -- which populate our standard encyclopedias and which are taught in universities worldwide.  I am sure that you are not declaring that the late Mike Coe was an idiot, but instead that you respect him and the basic work that he and his colleagues have done.  If that is so, I don't understand what you are talking about here.  No sure that you understand the implications of what you have said.  Perhaps you could clarify, cinepro.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I think the Internet has made more idiots than geniuses. Access to knowledge is not the primary contributor to being a genius...............................................

I specified when used effectively.  And my meaning was that no polymath in the past could access such a diversity of data on command.  Give an idiot a computer and he is an idiot still.  Give an intelligent man a computer and it makes him appear to be a genius.  Does that restatement meet with your approval?  I am, by the way, not the first to make this observation.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The BoM doesn't have to be a fraud at all, I think they got different ideas from all around and even could have been prompted. It can be true if it leads someone to Christ. This because of all of the new information out there that has come to light. I believe that Oliver helped Joseph put it all down in words. But something that bothers is them trying to sell the copyright.

But so I don't derail, I think Joseph got help by others to make the BoM coherent, if it's true that he can't write this book. He does have a good memory and I believe knew his Bible well. Therefore he was able to talk and the transcribers listened. 

 

3 hours ago, pogi said:

That is not at all what the Book claims to be though - a compilation of contemporary ideas from "all around".  If Joseph and Oliver actually authored the book, how would that not be fraudulent given their claims? 

If that is how the BofM was authored then it would be obvious on nearly every page.  That would require no more than an afternoon of reading and note-taking.  What we have instead is deep complexity and ancient ties, as this short video enumerates:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-XC05DHH2w .

 

[rpn]

Tutelage by the Holy Ghost has a way of increasing all the capacities of the natural man.  (See Parley P. Pratt's quote on the Holy Ghost.)

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You seem incoherent here, cinepro.  Just like the police captain in "Casa Blanca," you express faux shock

Robert, just as a personal FYI....I enjoy your posts, providing lots of info and analysis, but you lose me when you start attributing emotion or motives...personal stuff that is unnecessary to the analysis of information.  And I don't find you as accurate when you venture into that territory, which harms the credibility of your solid work, imo.

It is pure selfishness that I am posting this as I want to keep enjoying your posts and it seems to me that over time, more of your posts contain this type of speculation about other posters, which has been lessening my overall enjoyment.